CASTRAL INDIA LTD, V. DCIT RG 8(3),

MA 435/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9437 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 12-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, C, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL, JM AND RAJENDRA , AM M.A. NO. 435/MUM/2012 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 8191/MUM/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06) M/S CASTROL INDIA LIMITED, TECHNOPOLIS KNOWLEDGE PARK, MAHAKALI CAVES ROAD, ANDHERI (EAST), MUMBAI 400 093. PAN: AAACC4481E THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RANGE 8(3), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI. APPLICANT V/S RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING : 12- 10-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12-10-201 2 APPLICANT BY : SHRI APURVA SHAH ESPONDENT BY : SHRI V. K RISHNAMURTHY O R D E R PER DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL (JM) THIS MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR TH E A.Y. 2005-06 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL I N ITA NO. 8191/MUM/2010 DTD. 12-06-2012. 2. THE APPLICANT IN THE MISC. APPLICATION DTD. 25-0 6-2012 SUPPORTED BY AFFIDAVIT DTD. 25-6-2012 OF MR. SHAUVIK GHOSH, HEAD OF TAX, CASTROL INDIA LIMITED INTER ALIA STATED THAT ON MAKING THE NECES SARY ENQUIRIES, THEY HAVE FOUND OUT THAT THE NOTICE FOR THE SAID HEARING WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 30-4-2012. THE SAME WAS GIVEN BY THE MAIL ROOM EXE CUTIVE TO MS. VERONICA GONSALVES (BUSINESS SUPPORT EXECUTIVE, TAX), WHO WA S A NEW RECRUIT ON THE TAX TEAM JOINING DATE BEING 22-2-2012. MS. BELINDA JAMES WHO HANDLED THIS EARLIER HAD BEEN SHIFTED TO A NEW ROLE OF INDIRECT TAX EXECUTIVE AT BANDRA KURLA MA 435/MUM/2012 2 COMPLEX OFFICE IN THE MONTH OF MARCH, 2012. MS. GO NSALVES KEPT THE NOTICE IN THE FILE AND DID NOT FORWARD IT TO THE AUTHORISED R EPRESENTATIVE OR THE REST OF THE TAX TEAM. CONSEQUENTLY THE TAX TEAM WAS NOT IN KNOW OF THE SAID NOTICE AND, HENCE, COULD NOT MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO HAVE THE MATTER APPEARED IN ON THE DATE FIXED. IT WAS, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. D.R. DID NOT OBJ ECT TO THE RECALLING OF THE ORDER. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE RIVAL PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AFTER HA VING 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 EX-PARTE ORDER DTD. 12-6-2012 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS RECALLED. PARTIES ARE TO APPEAR WIT HOUT WAITING FOR ANY NOTICE ON 06-12-2012 AS INFORMED IN THE OPEN COURT. ACCORD INGLY THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12-10-2012. SD/- SD/- (RAJENDRA) (DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 12-10-2012. RK.: MA 435/MUM/2012 3 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT , CONCERNED, MUMBAI 4. CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI 5. DR D BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI