, C IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 314/AHD/2019 A.Y. 2 009-10 ( IN I.T.A. NO. 3478/AHD/2015- A.Y. 2009-10 ) NAINUDEVI A. PRAJAPATI PROP. M/S. BRAHMANI TRADING CO., 492, GIDC, MAKARPURA, NR. HIMALAYA MACHINERY, BARODA / VS. ITO WARD 2(2), BARODA / / PAN/GIR NO. : ALXPP5917H ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI JIMI PATEL, A.R. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIDHYUT TRIVEDI, SR.D.R. / DATE OF HEARING 20/12/2019 '# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 31/12/2019 / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM: THE CAPTIONED MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FI LED AT THE INSTANCE OF ASSESSEE SEEKING RECALL OF EX PARTE ORDER DATED 26.02.2019 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL UNDER S.254(1) OF THE ACT M.A. NO. 314/AHD/19 [NAINUDEVI A. PRAJAPATI VS. ITO] A.Y. 2009-10 - 2 - WHEREBY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED IN LIMINE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION OF ITS APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE. 2. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, THE LEAR NED AR FOR THE ASSESSEE VIDE ITS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION CON TENDED AS UNDER: 1. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPLICANT-ASSESSEE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 25.02.2019, ON WHICH DATE THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT NOR WAS THERE ANY APPLICATION FILED SEEKING FOR ADJOURNMENT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WAS PRESUMED THAT THE APPLICANT-A SSESSEE WAS NOT SERIOUS IN PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED. 2. THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE APPLICANT- ASSESSEE IN LIMINE DRAWING SUPPORT FROM THE DECISIO N OF THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN C.I.T. VS. MULTI PLAN INDIA (P) LTD. - 38 ITD 320 (DELHI) AND HON'BLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF THE ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR V. C.W.T. -223 ITR 480 (MP). 3. THE APPLICANT-ASSESSEE HUMBLY SUBMITS THAT SHE W AS NOT AWARE ABOUT THE DATE OF HEARING AS THERE WAS SOME MISUNDERSTANDING AND COMMUNICATION GAP BETWEEN THE PROFESSIONALS, WHO WERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT- ASSESSEE. THIS MISUNDERSTANDING AND COMMUNICATION G AP BETWEEN THE PROFESSIONALS THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPLICANT-ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED. THE APPL ICANT- ASSESSEE IS VERY SERIOUS ABOUT PURSUING THE APPEAL FILED, AND THEREFORE, PRAYS OF YOUR HONOUR TO KINDLY RECALL AN D RESTORE THE ABOVE MENTIONED APPEAL. 4. THE APPLICANT-ASSESSEE ASSURES THE HON'BLE BENC H THAT SUCH A DEFAULT HAS OCCURRED BECAUSE OF THE ABOVE MENTION ED BONA FIDE SITUATION AND FURTHER ASSURES THE HON'BLE BENC H THAT THE APPEARANCE ON HIS BEHALF WOULD BE THERE ON THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING. IT IS FURTHER REQUESTED THAT IN VIEW OF TH E ABOVE MENTIONED FACTS, THE APPEAL MAY KINDLY BE RECALLED AND AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING MAY KINDLY BE GRANTED TO THE APPLICANT-ASSESSEE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. 3. AFTER CONSIDERING THE CIRCUMSTANCES EXISTING IN THE CASE AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, WE ARE SATISFIED T HAT THE REASONABLE CAUSE EXISTED FOR FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESS EE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE ITAT ON THE DATE OF HEARING. ACCORDINGLY, WE RE CALL THE ORDER OF M.A. NO. 314/AHD/19 [NAINUDEVI A. PRAJAPATI VS. ITO] A.Y. 2009-10 - 3 - THE ITAT AHMEDABAD BENCH 'C' PASSED IN ITA NO. 3478 /AHD/2015 DATED 26/02/2019(SUPRA) AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO LIST THE APPEAL FOR FRESH HEARING ON 10/02/2020 FIXED IN CONSULTATION WITH BOTH THE SIDES PRESENT. THEREFORE, FORMAL NOTICE OF HEARING IS DISPENSED WITH THE CONSENT OF BOTH PARTIES. 4. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (PRADIP KUMAR K EDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 31/12/2019 TRUE COPY S. K. SINHA ! / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- & / REVENUE 2 / ASSESSEE ( ) *+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4 ,- / CIT (A) / 012 33*+4 *+#4 56) / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 7 289 : / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / 4 / 5 *+#4 56) THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 31/12/2019