KAYPAN VANIJYA P.LTD, V. ITO 6(2)(4),

MA 503/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9738 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 07-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 02-08-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: DI LIP J THAKKAR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI BENCH,A MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA NO : 503/MUM/2012 ARISING OUT OF : ITA NO. 2943/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 M/S. KAYPAN VANIJYA PVT. LTD. 2, VARDHMAN COMPLEX LBS MARG, VIKROLI (W) MUMBAI-400 083 PAN NO : AAACK 3290 K INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 6(2)(4) AAYKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD, CHURCHGATE MUMBAI-400 020 (APPLICANT) VS. (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI DILIP J. THAKKAR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MOHIT JAIN DATE OF HEARING : 07.12.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.12.2012 ORDER PER RAJENDRA SINGH (AM). THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE REQUESTING FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER DATED 10.5.2012 OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 2943/M/2011. IN THE SAID ORDER, THE TRIBUNAL HAD DISMISSED THE GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE OF CLE ARING AND FORWARDING CHARGES OF RS.4,60,676/- UNDER SECTION 40(A)( IA) AS NO ONE HAD APPEARED TO REPRESENT THE CASE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSE SSEE. THE ASSESSEE IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT BEEN ISSUED ANY FORMAL NOTICE OF HEARING. THE DATE OF HEARING HAD BEEN MENTIONED IN THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT SLIP OF THE MA NO : 503/MUM/2012 ARISING OUT OF : ITA NO. 2943/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 2 APPEAL FILED. THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY SUCH PROCED URE WHICH WAS THE REASON FOR NON-COMPLIANCE. A AFFIDAVIT TO THAT EFFECT HAS BEEN FILED AND IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED THAT THE ORDER MAY BE RECALLED FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION 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 ON THE DATE OF HEARI NG. ACCORDINGLY WE RE-CALL THE ORDER DATED 10.5.2012 OF T HE TRIBUNAL AND RESTORE THE APPEAL TO ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER WHICH WILL B E HEARD ON 22.1.2013. THE DATE OF HEARING WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, AND THEREFORE, NO FORMAL NOTICE OF HEARING IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUE BY THE REGISTRY. 3. IN THE RESULT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSE SSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7.12.2012. SD/- SD/- (D. MANMOHAN) VICE PRESIDENT (RAJENDRA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 7.12.2012. JV. MA NO : 503/MUM/2012 ARISING OUT OF : ITA NO. 2943/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 3 COPY TO: THE APPLICANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR A BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.