M/s Green Line Motors., Belgaum V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2 (1), Belgaum., Belgaum

MA 54/PAN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4370 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 04-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 04-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 26-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMESH S MUTAGAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S R KOKATE I T P

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI , HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A.NO. 54/PAN/2015 ( ITA NO. 381 /P A N/201 4 ) (ASST. YEAR : 200 5 - 0 6 ) M/S. GREEN LINE MOTORS, DILIP D. CHOPRA, STARLINE MOTORS, KAKATI INDUSTRIAL AREA, KAKATI, BELGAUM . VS. ITO , WARD - 2(1), BELGAUM PAN NO. AAEFG 2535 L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.R. KOKATE ITP . DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAMESH S. MUTAGAR - D R DATE OF HEARING : 0 4 / 0 5 /201 6 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04 / 0 5 /201 6 . O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS IS A MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 381/PAN/2014 BELGAUM , DATED 22 /0 8 1 /201 5 . 2. SHRI S.R. KOKATE, ITP REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI RAMESH S. MUTAGAR, DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REV E NUE. 3 . IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN LIMIN E BY APPLYING 38 ITD 320 (DEL.) . THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE REASON THAT AS THE LEGAL HEIRS OF THE DECEASED - PARTNERS WERE ATTENDING THE INCOME - TAX PROCEEDINGS AT BOMBAY , T HE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO 2 M A NO. 54 /P A N/201 5 INTIMATE THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING THE DETAILS OF THE APPEAL. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THOUGH , AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED, THE SAME H AD BEEN REJECTED AS IT WAS LACKING PROPER REASONS. IT WAS THE PRAYER THAT THE ORDER MAY BE RECALLED AND DISPOSED OF ON MERITS. 4 . DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION. 5. CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE ARE REASONABLE AND CONSEQUENTLY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 22/01/2015 IN ITA NO. 381/PNJ/2014 STANDS RECALLED AND THE APPEAL IS RESTORED ITS ORIGINAL STATUS. THE APPEAL, NOW , STANDS POSTED FOR HEARING ON 12/05/2016 . BOTH THE PARTIES INFORMED IN OPEN COURT , CONSEQUENTLY NO NOTICE IS ISSUED . 6 . IN THE RESULT, MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT AT THE CLOSE OF THE HEARING ON WEDNESDAY , THE 0 4 TH DAY OF MAY , 201 6 AT GOA . S D / - S D / - (N.S.SAINI) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 0 4 TH MAY , 201 6 . VR/ - COPY TO: 1 . THE ASSESSEE. 2 . THE REVENUE. 3 . THE CIT 4 . THE CIT(A) 5 . THE D.R . 6 . GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PANAJI . 3 M A NO. 54 /P A N/201 5