` IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI . , ! '#$ % & , ' '#$ '( BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA 407/MUM/2013 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 6566/MUM/2011, AY 2008-09 ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE -21(1), ROOM NO. 601, C-10, PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, MUMBAI -400 051 VS MS. ASHA KASHIPRASAD RINGSHIA, PANDURANG SADAN, HANUMAN ROAD, VILE PARLE (E), MUMBAI -400 057 PAN AACPR 3758 C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI PITAMBAR DAS RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SANDEEP RAJGOR /DATE OF HEARING : 07-02-2014 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07-02-2014 # ) O R D E R % & , ': PER VIVEK VARMA, JM: THE INSTANT MA, FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT U/S 254(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, DOES NOT STAND BECAUSE, AT THE TIME OF H EARING, THE DR FOR THE REVENUE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE ORDER U/S 254(2), REC TIFYING ITA NO. 2901/M/2011 BEFORE US, WHICH IN HIS OPINION WAS NEC ESSARY. 2. SINCE, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE SAID MA ORDER WAS NOT PRODUCED AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER WAS BASED ON THE ORDER IN ITA NO . 2901/MUM/2011, NO MS. ASHA KASHIPRASAD RINGSHIA. MA 407/MUM/2013 2 FAULT COULD BE ATTRIBUTED IN THE ORDER SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED. HENCE, THE MA FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT DOES NOT STAND AND DESERVES TO BE DISMISSED AS SUCH. 3. THE MA, FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT STANDS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7 TH FEBRUARY, 2013. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( % & ) ! '#$ '#$ (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) (VIVEK VARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 7 TH FEBRUARY, 2014 / COPY TO:- 1) / THE APPELLANT. 2) / THE RESPONDENT. 3) (!) - 32, #$% / THE CIT(A) -32, MUMBAI. 4) -21, #$% / THE CIT 21, MUMBAI, 5) !&' () * , () , #$% / THE D.R. A BENCH, MUMBAI. 6) '+, - COPY TO GUARD FILE. ./0 / BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / [ 1 / 2 $3 () , #$% DY. / ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., MUMBAI *562 . . * CHAVAN, SR. PS