, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNALE BENCH, MUMB AI . .. . . .. . , ,, , ! ! ! ! , ' ' ' ' # $ % # $ % # $ % # $ %, ,, , & ! & ! & ! & ! ' ' ' ' BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, AM AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, J M M.A.NO.279/MUM/2013 ARISING OUT OF ./ I.T.A. NO. 06/MUM/2011 ( &( ) &( ) &( ) &( ) '*) '*) '*) '*) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 ) M/S SAFARI MERCANTILE PRIVATE LIMITED, OFFICE NO.2, 3 RD FLOOR, CRESCENT CHAMBER, 56, TAMARIND LANE, FORT, MUMBAI- 400023 ( ( ( ( / VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 2(3), AAYKAR BHAVAN, M.K.MARG, MUMBAI-400020 !+ ./ PAN : AAACS6043C ( +, / APPELLANT ) .. ( -.+, / RESPONDENT ) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI NEELAM JADHAV -.+, / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SANJEEV JAIN (' / / DATE OF HEARING : 20-12-2013 12* / / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20 -12-2013 $ / O R D E R PER P.M.JAGTAP, AM: BY THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE I S SEEKING RECALL OF THE TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 22.04.2013 PASSED EX- PARTE IN ITA NO.06/MUM/2011 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS. THE APPEALLANT OFFICE WAS LACATED AT OFFICE NO.2, 3 RD FLOOR, CRESCENT CHAMBER, 56, TAMRIND LANE, FORT, MUMBAI-400023. DURING THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER, 2012 TO JUNE, 2013 THE OFFICE OF THE APPELLANT WAS UNDER RENOVATION AND WAS OCCUPIED ONLY BY THE WORKERS WHO WERE RENOVATING TH E OFFICE. THE OFFICE STAFF OF THE APPELLANT USED TO SIT AT OTHER OFFICE WHICH WAS LOCATED AT 16/860 VRINDAVAN CHS, MHB COLONY, KHER NAGAR, BANDRA (EAST ), MUMBAI-400051. THE NOTICE OF HEARING ISSUED ON 06/03/2013 MAY BE R ECEIVED BY ONE OF THE WORKERS WHO WAS DOING RENOVATION WORK AT THE OFFICE PREMISES I.E. OFFICER NO.2, 3 RD FLOOR, CRESCENT CHAMBER, 56, TAMRIND LANE, FORT, M UMBAI-400023. THE WORKER DOING WORK THERE, MAY NOT BE AWARE ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE NOTICE RECEIVED, AND WOULD HAVE FORGOT TO GIVE IT T O THE CONCERNED PERSON OF THE COMPANY. 2 M.A. NOS.279/MUM/2013 WHEN THE ORDER RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY, T HEY CAME TO KNOW THAT HEARING WAS ALREADY DONE AND EX-PARTE ORDER HAS BEE N PASSED BY THE HONBLE ITAT AGAINST THE APPELLANT. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES A ND ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. SINCE THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ITS NON-APPEARANCE IN THE PRESENT APPLICATION ARE DULY SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE DIRECTO R AFFIRMING THE RELEVANT FACTS, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS A R EASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON COMPLIANCE ON PART OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE RECALL THE ORDER DATED 22.04.2013 OF TH E TRIBUNAL AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER WHICH WOU LD BE HEARD ON 12.05.2014. THE DATE OF HEARING WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND THEREFORE NO F ORMAL NOTICE IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRY. 4. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 /12/20 13 $ / 12* 3 4 ( 20 /12/2013 , 2 / 5 SD/- ( AMIT SHUKLA ) SD/- (P.M.JAGTAP) & ! / JUDICIAL MEMBER ! / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; 4 ( /DATED : 20 TH DECEMBER , 2013. F{X~{T? P.S. $ $ $ $ / // / - - - - 76* 76* 76* 76* / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. +, / THE APPELLANT 2. -.+, / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 8 ( ) / THE CIT- , MUMBAI. 4. 8 / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 3 M.A. NOS.279/MUM/2013 5. 6'9 -&&( , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. :) ; / GUARD FILE. $( $( $( $( / BY ORDER, .6 -& //TRUE COPY// < << < / = = = = (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI