XCEL VISION TECHNOLOGIES LTD, V. ITO WD 8(3)(4),

MA 427/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4975 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: UMA MAHADEVKA R

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH G : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL,(AM) AND SHRI D.K. AGARWAL, (JM) MA NO.427/MUM/2010 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.1060/MUM/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06 M/S. XCEL VISION TECHNOLOGIES LTD. 304-M, VIJAY INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LINK ROAD, CHINCHOLI BUNDER MALAD (W) MUMBAI-400 064. ..( APPLICANT ) P.A. NO. (AABCC 1992 K) VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(3)(4) AAYAKAR BHAVAN MUMBAI. ..( RESPONDENT ) APPLICANT BY : MS. U MA MAHADEVKAR RESPONDENT BY : NONE O R D E R PER D.K. AGARWAL (JM). THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE I S DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.4.2010 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.1060/MUM/2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. THE APPLICANT VIDE HIS PETITION DATED 29.6.2010 SUP PORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 1.7.2010 OF SHRI AJIT GHADI, AN EMP LOYEE OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY INTERALIA STATED ON OATH THAT : 2. THAT I HAD BEEN ASSIGNED THE WORK OF ATTENDING TO THE ITAT APPEAL NO. I.T.A. NO.1060/MUM/2009 ON 11.11.20 09 FOR MA NO.427/M/10 A.Y:05-06 2 WHICH MY EMPLOYER HAD RECEIVED A NOTICE OF HEARING FROM ITAT G BENCH, MUMBAI. ... .. . . .. .. .. .. 7. THAT I WAS NOT AWARE THAT THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO ANY FUTURE DATE NOR DID MY EMPLOYER RECEIVE ANY NOTICE OF HEARING IN RESPECT OF THE SAID APPEAL. IT WAS, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT THE EXPARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE SUBMITS THAT FOR THE REASONS MENTIONED IN ASSESSEES APPLICATION, TH E EXPARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AFTER H AVING SATISFIED ABOUT THE REASONS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND CONSIDERING T HE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE OR HIS AUTHORIZE D REPRESENTATIVE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND ACCORDINGLY THE EXPARTE ORDER DATED 20.4.2010 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS RECALLED. PARTIES ARE TO APPEAR WITHOUT WAITING FOR ANY NOTICE ON 11.10.2010 AS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT . 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION STA NDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15.9.2010. SD/- SD/- (R.S. SYAL ) ( D.K. AGARWAL ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 15.9.2010 JV. MA NO.427/M/10 A.Y:05-06 3 COPY TO: THE APPLICANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR BENCH TRUE COPY BY O RDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.