CHANDRASHEKHAR G. GUPTE (HUF), V. ITO WD 1(3),

MA 385/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9861 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-01-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 15-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: LALIT M JAIN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Non compliance

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH, C MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO: 385/MUM/2012 ARISING OUT OF : ITA NO.6860/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 SHRI CHANDRASHEKAR GHANSHYAMDAS GUPTA HUF LALIT M. JAIN & CO., 2 ND FLOOR SHANKESHWAR PLAZA 309 TELIPADA, THANA ROAD BHIWANDI-421 302 PAN: AAAHG 5669 P THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3) THANE. (APPLICANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI LALIT M. JAIN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MOHIT JAIN DATE OF HEARING : 18.01.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.01.2013 ORDER PER RAJENDRA SINGH (AM). THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE REQUESTING FOR RE-CALL OF THE ORDER DATED 13.3.2012 OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.6860/MUM/2010. IN THE SAID ORDER THE TRIBUNAL HA D DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED FOR WANT OF REPRESENT ATION BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING. 2. IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE HA S SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEES REPRESENTATIVE WAS OUT OF TOWN ON THE DA TE OF HEARING ON 13.3.2012 MA NO.385/M/12 ARISING OUT OF ITA N O. 6860/M/10 A.Y: 07-08 2 WHICH WAS THE REASON FOR NON-COMPLIANCE. THE ASSESS EE HAD FILED AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION VIDE LETTER DATED 5.3.2012 WHICH WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON THE GROUND THAT NO ONE HAD APPEARED ON THAT DATE. THE ASSESSEE HAD REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE AS REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS OUT OF TOWN. AN AFFIDAVIT TO THE ABOVE EFFECT HAS BEEN FILED AND IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED THAT THE ORDER MAY BE RECALLED F OR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES, PERUSED THE RECORDS AND CONSIDERED THE MATTER CAREFULLY. WE ARE SATISFIED ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON COMPLIANCE BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING ON 13.3.2012. ACCORDINGLY IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE W E RECALL THE ORDER DATED 13.3.2012 OF THE TRIBUNAL AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER WHICH WILL BE HEARD ON 11.3.2013. THE DATE OF HEARING WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, AND THEREFORE, NO FORMAL NOTICE OF HEARING I S REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRY. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.1.2013. SD/- SD/- (VIVEK VARMA) ( RAJENDRA SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUN TANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 18.1.2013. JV. MA NO.385/M/12 ARISING OUT OF ITA N O. 6860/M/10 A.Y: 07-08 3 COPY TO: THE APPLICANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.