॥ आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पुणे “अ” न्यायपीठ, पुणे में॥ ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Virtual hearing) विविध आिेदन / MA No. 45/PUN/2023 (आयकर अपील स ं . / ITA No.285/PUN/2018) वनधधारण िर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Vibrant Shelter Pvt. Ltd., C/o R.D. Gopalani, Advocate, ‘Shital’, Rajnagar, Opp. ZP School, Katol Road, Nagpur PAN : AACCV 9904 F . . . . . . . अपीलधर्थी / Appellant बनधम / V/s. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-13, Pune. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध/ Appearances Assessee by : Mr Kapil Hirani [Ld. AR] Revenue by : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [Ld. DR] स ु नवाईकीतारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing :20/10/2023 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date of Pronouncement :03/11/2023 आदेश/ ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; This Miscellaneous Application [‘MA’ in short] is directed against the order of this Tribunal in ITA No. 285/PUN/2018, dt. 10/10/2022 passed u/s 254(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ in short]. 2. During the course of virtual hearing, without pointing out any apparent mistake in the impugned order, the Ld. AR submitted that, as per the information available on the web-portal of by the office order of ITAT, the Bench was cancelled and the matter of the appellant was adjourned for hearing from 10/10/2022 to 14/11/2022. Subsequent constitution of the bench was not in the knowledge of the appellant; hence rescheduled hearing could not be attended. For Vibrant Shelter Pvt. Ltd. MA No.45/PUN/2013 Arising out of 285/PUN/2018 ITAT-Pune Page 2 of 2 the reason, the appellant seeks recalling of the impugned ex-parte order of this tribunal for according an opportunity to represent the case on merits. 3. Per contra, the Ld. DR stated that, through for sufficient reasons, the appellant could not represents its case at the rescheduled date, however the tribunal has adjudicated the matter on merits ex-parte, therefore the exercise of recalling of the impugned order would be futile. 4. We have heard rival contentions of both the parties; subject to Rule 18 of ITAT Rules, 1963, perused the material placed on record. 5. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, we find the reasons behind non-appearance of the appellant at the rescheduled hearing as ‘sufficient’ for the purpose of rule 24 of ITAT-Rules, 1963 therefore in our considered view the case is fit for recall of the appeal. Thus ordered accordingly. 4. In result, the MA filed by the assessee stands ALLOWED. U/r 34 of ITAT-Rules, order pronounced in open court on this Friday 03 rd day of November, 2023. -S/d- -S/d- S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER प ु णे/ PUNE ; ददना ां क / Dated : 03 rd day of November, 2023. आदेशकीप्रविवलवपअग्रेवर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपीलाथी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. The CIT-(A),Concerned, Pune 4. The Pr. CIT, (concerned), Pune 5. DR, ITAT, Pune Bench, Pune 6.गार्डफ़ाइल / Guard File. vr आदेशान ु सार / By Order, वररष्ठदनजीसदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकरअपीलीयन्यायादधकरण, प ु णे / ITAT, Pune.