NEHAL CORPORATION, MUMBAI V. ITO 16(3)(2), MUMBAI

MA 288/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5255 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 22-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GANESH BORA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH SMC, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S.PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO.288/MUM/2016 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.3610/MUM/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02) M/S. NEHAL CORPORATION, 31, A/B VASANT VILAS,D.D.SATHE MARG, MUMBAI- 400 007 PAN: AADFN 1514B ...... APPLICA NT VS. THE ITO, WARD 16(3)(2), 2 ND FLOOR, MATRU MANDIR, TARDEO ROAD, GRANT ROAD, MUMBAI 400 007 .... RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : SHRI RAJIV KHANDE LWAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI GANESH BORA DATE OF HEARING : 06/01/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13/0 1/2017 ORDER PER G.S.PANNU,A.M: VIDE THE ABOVE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASS ESSEE IS SEEKING RECALL OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL DATED 05/07/2 016, IN ITA NO. 3610/MUM/2015 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. 2. ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHAL F OF THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE. THEREFORE, THE ABOVE APPEAL WAD DECIDED EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE, AFTER HEARING LD. DEPARTMENTAL RE PRESENTATIVE. IT IS 2 M.A. NO.288/MUM/2016 SUBMITTED BEFORE US BY THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD APPOINTED MR. RAJIV KHANDELWAL, CHARTE RED ACCOUNTANT TO APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HOWEVER, THE CHARTERED ACCOUN TANT FAILED TO NOTE THE DATE OF HEARING IN HIS APPOINTMENT DIARY AND AS A C ONSEQUENCE HE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE FIXED DATE OF HEA RING. THUS, IT HAS BEEN EXPLAINED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASO NABLE AND SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE FIXED DATE OF HEARING. 3. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION, AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON TH E DATE OF HEARING IS SUPPORTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEREFORE, AS PER RU LE-24 OF APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963 WE SET ASIDE THE AFOREMENTIONED EX-PART E ORDER DATED 05/07/2016 AND RESTORE THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE WHICH WILL NOW BE FIXED FOR HEARING ON 14/02/2017. THE DATE WAS NOTED BY THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSES SEE WAIVING HIS RIGHT TO RECEIVE NOTICE OF HEARING FOR 14/02/2017. WE DIREC T ACCORDINGLY. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED, AS ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13/01/2017 SD/ SD/- ( RAVISH SOOD) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOCUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 13/01/2017 VM , SR. PS 3 M.A. NO.288/MUM/2016 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT , 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI