HARSHAD V VORA, V. ASST CIT 13(2),

MA 427/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2829 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL H BENCH, MUM BAI , , BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, AM AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JM ./MA NO. 427/MUM/2014 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 6982/MUM/2011) ( / ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2008-09) HARSHAD V. VORA UTKARSH STEEL CORPORATION, 40, CARNAC SIDING ROAD, IRON MARKET, CARNAC BUNDER, MUMBAI-400 009 / VS. ASST. CIT 13(2), ROOM NO. 421, 4 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M. K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400 020 ./' ./PAN/GIR NO. AAAPV 7400 R ( APP LICANT ) : ( RESPONDENT ) APPLICANT BY : MS. NEHA PARANJPE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N. PADMANABHAN # $ % & ' / DATE OF HEARING : 20.02.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.02.2015 ( / O R D E R PER SANJAY ARORA, A. M.: THIS IS A MISCELLANEOUS PETITION BY THE ASSESSEE, D IRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 04.04.2013 BY THE TRIBUNAL, DISMISSING IN LIMINE ITS CAPTIONED APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 VIDE ORDER U/S. 254(1) OF THE INCOME TAX AC T, 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER). 2. THE DISMISSAL OF ITS APPEAL BY THE TRIBUNAL WAS ON ACCOUNT OF NON-REPRESENTATION, RELYING ON THE DECISIONS BY THE HIGHER COURTS OF LA W, INCLUDING BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHEMIPOL VS. UNION OF INDIA (IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO. 62 OF 2009). THE ASSESSEE HAS NOW MOVED THE INSTANT APPLICATION, STATING THE 2 MA NO. 427/MUM/2014 (A.Y. 2008-09) HARSHAD V. VORA VS. ASST. CIT REASON/S FOR THE NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEAR ING, I.E., 04.04.2013, WHICH STAND FURTHER AVERRED PER A DULY ATTESTED AFFIDAVIT DATED 01.02.2015 BY THE ASSESSEE-DEPONENT. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES, AND PERUSED THE MATER IAL ON RECORD. ON AN APPRAISAL OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THE AS SESSEE IS EARNEST IN PROSECUTING ITS APPEAL, AND THE NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING WAS O N ACCOUNT OF BONA FIDE REASONS. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ONLY CONSIDER IT FIT AN D PROPER TO RECALL THE IMPUGNED ORDER FOR HEARING THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AFRESH, AND ADJUD ICATION ON MERITS, AFTER HEARING THE PARTIES. THE DATE OF HEARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WA S ALSO, WITH THE CONSENT OF THE PARTIES, AGREED UPON FOR 25.03.2015 , SO THAT NO NOTICE OF HEARING SHALL BE SENT. WE DE CIDE ACCORDINGLY. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON FEBRUARY 20, 2015 SD/- SD/- (VIVEK VARMA) (SANJAY ARORA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER # )$ MUMBAI; * DATED : 24.02.2015 .../ ROSHANI , SR. PS !' # $%&' (!'% / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. + , / THE APPLICANT 2. -. , / THE RESPONDENT 3. # /& ( + ) / THE CIT(A) 4. # /& / CIT - CONCERNED 5. 2 3 -&4 , + ' 45 , # )$ / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 3 6 7 $ / GUARD FILE !' ) / BY ORDER, */)+ , (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , # )$ / ITAT, MUMBAI