BHARAT KUMAR S. JAIN, MUMBAI V. ITO 19(1)(2), MUMBAI

MA 488/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5856 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 14-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PADMA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY , JUDICIAL M.A. NO. 488, 489 & 490/MUM./2019 ( ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 3212, 3213 & 3214 /MUM./201 8 ) ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009 10, 2010 11 & 2011 12 ) BHARAT KUMAR S. JAIN ROOM NO.12, 2 ND FLOOR KAHANBAUG BUILDING 2 ND CARPENTER STREET MUMBAI 400 004 PAN AEKPJ0881J . APPELLANT V/S INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 19(1)(2), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI DHAVAL SHAH REVENUE BY : SHRI PADMAPANI BORA DATE OF HEARING 08 . 1 1 .20 19 DATE OF ORDER 14.02.2020 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY. J.M. B Y TH E S E APPLICATION S , THE ASSESSEE SEEKS RECALL OF CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 28 TH FEBRUARY 2019, PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL DISPOSING OFF THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009 10, 2010 11 AND 2011 12. 2. EXPLAINING THE REASON FOR NON APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING OF APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE SUBMISSIONS IN THE MISC. APPLICATION AS WELL AS THE AFFIDAVIT ACCOMPANYING THE 2 BHARAT KUMAR S. JAIN APPLICATIONS. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ITS COMMUNICATION ADDRESS HAS CHANGED FROM THE OLD TO NEW ADDRESS WHICH IS ROOM NO.12, 2 ND FLOOR, KAHANBAUG BUILDIN G, 2 ND CARPENTER STREET, MUMBAI 400 004. IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT IN THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 10, INADVERTENTLY, THE OLD ADDRESS WAS MENTIONED INSTEAD OF NEW ADDRESS. HOWEVER, IN THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEALS FILED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2010 1 1 AND 2011 12, THE NEW ADDRESS HAS BEEN MENTIONED. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED , THOUGH , THE APPEALS FOR THE AFORESAID ASSESSMENT YEARS WERE FILED ON THE VERY SAME DAY, HOWEVER, NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT IN THE OLD ADDRESS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE BEING UNAWARE OF THE DATE OF HEARING COULD NOT APPEAR TO REPRESENT THE CASE. THUS, THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED , THE EX PARTE ORDER PASSED MAY BE RECALLED. 3. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE LEFT IT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE BENCH. 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. NO DOUBT, ON THE DATE WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED FOR HEARING I.E., ON 28 TH FEBRUARY 2019, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT THE CASE. EVEN , THERE WAS NO APPLICATION BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING ADJOURNMENT. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE , THE BENCH PROCEEDED TO H EAR AND DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL EX PARTE QUA THE 3 BHARAT KUMAR S. JAIN ASSESSEE AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. HOWEVER, AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE AND AVERMENTS M ADE IN THE AFFIDAVIT ACCOMPANYING THE MISC. A PPLICATIONS, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE NON APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING WAS DUE TO BONAFIDE REASONS. THEREFORE, IN EXERCISE OF POWER CONFERRED UNDER RULE 24 OF THE ITAT RULES,1963 , I RECALL THE ORDER DATED 28 TH FEBRUARY 2019 AND RESTOR E THE APPEAL S TO THEIR ORIGINAL POSITION TO BE DECIDED BY THE ASSIGNED BENCH IN REGULAR COURSE. REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO ISSUE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE NEW ADDRESS INTIMATING THE FRESH DATE OF HEARING. 5. IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATIONS ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14.02.2020 SD/ - SAKT IJIT DEY JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 14.02.2020 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) THE ASSESSEE; (2) THE REVENUE; (3) THE CIT(A); (4) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; (5) THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; (6) GUARD FILE . TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI