TWINTY BIO TECH LTD, V. DCIT,

MA 273/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5302 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-10-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P N DEVDASAN

Judgement Text

1 MA 273/M/2010 M/S TRINITY BIO-TECH LTD. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E BEFORE SHRI D.K. AGARWAL, J.M. SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, A. M. MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 273/MUM/2010 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 01/MUM/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99 M/S TRINITY BIO TECH LTD., 62-C, MITTAL TOWER, C WINGH, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 21. PAN AAACB4362K VS. D.C.I.T., 6 TH FLOR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI . APPLICANT RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY SHRI SASHI TULSIYAN RESPONDENT BY SHRI P.N. DEVDASAN ORDER PER P.M. JAGTAP, A.M. BY THIS M.A., THE ASSESSEE IS SEEKING RECALL OF TH E TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 29.9.09 PASSED EX PARTE IN INTEREST TAX APPEAL NO. 01/MUM/0 8 ON THE GROUND THAT NOBODY COULD APPEAR ON ITS BEHALF ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED O N 03.09.2009 AS THE NOTICE OF THE SAID HEARING WAS NEVER RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AN D ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. SINCE THE REASONS ADVANCED BY T HE ASSESSEE FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING IS DULY SUBSTANTIATED BY AN AFFID AVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US AFFIRMING THE RELEVANT FACTS ON OATH, WE ARE SATISF IED THAT THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR THE NON-APPEARANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE WHEN ITS APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING ON 03.09.2009. WE, THEREFORE, RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 29 TH SEPTEMBER, 2009 (SUPRA) PASSED EX PARTE KEEPING IN VIEW THE PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 2 MA 273/M/2010 M/S TRINITY BIO-TECH LTD. RULES, 1963 AND RESTORE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AT ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX THE SAME FOR FRESH HEARING ON 11.11.2010 AS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AND TAKEN NOTE OF BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E SIDES. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON IST OCTOBER , 2010. SD/- S D/- (D.K. AGARWAL) (P.M. JAGTAP) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCO UNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED IST OCTOBER , 2010. RK COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED MUMBAI 4. THE CIT- CONCERNED MUMBAI 5. THE DR BENCH, E 6. MASTER FILE // TUE COPY// BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI 3 MA 273/M/2010 M/S TRINITY BIO-TECH LTD. DATE INITIALS 1. DRAFT DICTATED 1.10.2010. 1.10.10 SR.P.S./P.S. 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 1.10.2010, 4.10.10 SR.P.S./P.S. 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER. - J.M./A.M. 4.DRAFT DISCUSSED/ APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. J.M./A.M. 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P.S./P.S. SR.P.S./P.S. 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.P.S./P.S. 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.P.S./P.S. 8. DATE OF WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.