SONAL IMPEX P. LTD, V. ITO RG 8(3(2),

MA 470/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8211 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-05-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2012
• Assessment Year: 1996-1997
• Appeal Filed On: 12-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASTOQ AHMED
• Assessee Lawyers: SHIVCHARAN GIRKAR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Non compliance

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, E , BENCH BEFORE SHRI D.K. AGARWAL,J.M. AND SHRI RAJENDRA S INGH, A.M. MA NO: 470/MUM/2011 ARISING OUT OF :7405/M/2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1996-97 M/S. SONAL IMPEX LTD. 2 ND LAXMI INDL. ESTATE LINK ROAD, ANDHERI (E) MUMBAI-400 053. PAN NO.: AAACS 6293 E VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER RANGE-8(3)(2) MUMBAI. (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI SHIVCHARAN GIRKAR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ASTOQ AHMED DATE OF HEARING : 18.5.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.5.2012 ORDER PER RAJENDRA SINGH (AM). THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE REQUESTING FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER DATED 30.12.2009 O F THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.7409/M/07. THE TRIBUNAL IN THE SAID ORDER HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED FOR WANT OF NON-RE PRESENTATION. THE ASSESSEE IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS SUBMITTED T HAT NON ATTENDANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING WAS DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT RECEIVED NOTICE OF HEARING. THERE WAS CHA NGE IN THE ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE FROM 2 NE LAXMI INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, NEW LINK ROAD, ANDHERI (W), MUMBAI-400 053 TO PLOT NO. 28/1A , VILLAGE DHELU MA NO.470/M/11 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 7405/M/07 A.Y:96-97 2 TAKAI, ADOSI ROAD, OFF KAROLI PEN, KHOPOLI-410 203. NOTICE HAD BEEN SENT AT THE OLD ADDRESS AND, THEREFORE, ASSESSEE COULD NOT RECEIVE NOTICE AND MADE THE COMPLIANCE. THERE WAS THEREFORE, RE ASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF H EARING. AN AFFIDAVIT TO THE ABOVE EFFECT HAS ALSO BEEN FILED. A SSESSEE HAS ACCORDINGLY REQUESTED TO RECALL EXPARTE ORDER FOR FRESH DISPOSAL AFTER HEARING THE ASSESSEE. 2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE RECORDS AND CONSIDERED THE MATTER CAREFULLY. WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON COMPLIANCE BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE D ATE OF HEARING. WE, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE RE CALL THE ORDER DATED 30.12.2009 AND RESTORE THE SAME TO ITS ORIGINAL NUMBE R WHICH WILL BE HEARD ON 12.7.2012.THE DATE OF HEARING WAS ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND, THEREFO RE, NO FRESH NOTICE OF HEARING IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE REGISTRY. 3. IN THE RESULT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION STANDS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.5.2012. SD/- SD/- (D.K. AGARWAL) ( RAJENDRA SINGH ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 18.5.2012. JV. MA NO.470/M/11 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 7405/M/07 A.Y:96-97 3 COPY TO: THE APPLICANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.