AAKRUTI INVESTMENT LTD, V. ITO WD 9(2)(2),

MA 404/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3283 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 03-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A MUMBAI . . , , BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER /AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO.404/MUM/2014 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 3822 /MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 AAKRUTI INVESTMENTS LTD., 2 ND FLOOR, RAJAN HOUSE, APPASAHEB MARATHE MARG, PRABHADEVI, MUMBAI 400 025 / VS. THE ITO WARD 9(2)(2), AAYKAR BHAVAN, MK ROAD, MUMBAI 400020. ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AABCA 2579C APPLICANT .. RESPONDENT ) APPLICANT BY : SHRI NITESH JOSHI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI V.K.BORA ' # $ / DATE OF HEARING : 03/07/2015 ' # $ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03/07/2015 / O R D E R PER I.P.BANSAL, JM: VIDE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED AS ABOVE, THE ASSESSEE IS SEEKING RECALL OF THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL DATED 20/02/2014, WHEN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DECIDED ON MERITS EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUNDS THAT DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE ON A SSESSEE NOBODY REPRESENTED THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL ON THAT DAY. IT IS THE CASE OF LD. A.R THAT THOUGH THE HEARING WAS ADJOURNED AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASS ESSEE TO 20/2/2014 IN PRESENCE OF SHRI RISHIKESH OJHA, CHARTERED ACCOUNTA NT, BUT DUE TO OVERSIGHT HE FORGOT TO RECORD THE SAID DATE IN THE APPOINTME NT DIARY MAINTAINED FOR M.A. NO.404/MUM/2014 2 INCOME TAX MATTERS AND SUCH FAILURE ON HIS PART W AS THE REASON FOR NON- REPRESENTATION ON 20/02/2014 BY THE ASSESSEE. SUCH CLAIM IS SUPPORTED BY THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY SHRI RISHIKESH OJHA, CHARTER ED ACCOUNTANT STATING THE FACT THAT HE DID NOT RECORD THAT DATE IN HIS DIARY THROU GH PURE INADVERTENCE. 2. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION WE HAVE HEARD BOT H THE PARTIES. BY THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY A N AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE W AS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON- APPEARANCE BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE FIXED DATE OF HEA RING. THEREFORE, APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL RULE 1963, WE SET ASIDE THE AFOREMENTIONED EX-PARTE ORDER DATED 20/02 /2014 AND RESTORE THE APPEAL FOR FRESH HEARING. THE APPEAL SHALL BE NOW FIXED FOR HEARING ON 20/8/2014. THE SAID DATE WAS DULY NOTED BY LD. AR WAIVING HIS RIGHT TO RECEIVE THE NOTICE OF HEARING FOR THAT DATE. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN THE MANNER AFORESAID. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 3/07/2015 ' ) * + 03/07/2015 ' SD/- SD/- ( / SANJAY ARORA ) ( . . / I.P. BANSAL ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; * DATED 03/07/2015 M.A. NO.404/MUM/2014 3 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. - / THE APPELLANT 2. ./- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 0# ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. 0# / CIT 5. 12 .#34 , $ 34 , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, / 1# .# //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI . . ./ VM , SR. PS