M/S. BHALARIA STEEL CORPORATION, MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 18 (1) (2), MUMBAI

MA 707/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5062 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 23-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 03-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AKHTAR HANSARI
• Keywords: Recovery proceedings

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B , BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N.PRASAD , JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM MA NO. 707/MUM/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 7220/MUM/2007 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004 - 05 ) M/S. BHALARIA STEEL CORPORATION, 401, SONI HOUSE, 1 9, SUVARNA NAGAR CHS LTD VILEPARLE (WEST), MUMBAI 400 056 VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 18(1)(2) EARNEST HOUSE NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI 400 021 PAN/GIR NO. AAAFB3459N (APPELLANT ) .. (RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI KETAN VAJANI REVENUE BY SHRI AKH TAR H ANSARI DATE OF HEARING 18 / 10 /2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 23 / 10 /2019 / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M) : BY VIRTUE OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE SEEKS TO RECALL THE EXPARTE ORDER PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 27/05/20 0 9. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS APPLICATION HAS STATED THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL WAS NOT SERVED ON IT. 2. THE LD. AR BEFORE US STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE CAME TO KNOW OF THE FACT THAT THIS APPEAL HAS ALREADY BEEN DISPOSED OFF BY THIS TRIBUNAL ONLY WHEN RECOVERY PROCEEDINGS FOR DEMAND WERE ENFORCED BY THE LD. AO ON THE ASSESSEE. AT THAT POINT IN TIME , ASSESSEE WAS INFORMED BY THE D EPARTMENT THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAD ALREADY DISPOSED OFF THIS APPEAL WAY M A NO. 707/MUM/2018 M/S. BHALARIA STEEL CORPORATION 2 BACK IN MAY 2009. ACCORDINGLY , NEW CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OF THE ASSESSEE COLLECTED THE TRIBUNAL ORDER ON 18/06/2018 FROM THE REGISTRY. IN SUPPORT OF THESE FACTS, THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE AFFIDAVIT. THE LD. AR IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID AFFIDAVIT REQUESTED FOR RECALLING OF THIS ORDER IN TERMS OF RULE 24 OF THE ITAT RULES AS THE ORIGINAL APPEAL WAS DISPOSED OFF EXPARTE BY THIS TRIBUNAL. 3. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR VEHEMENTLY OBJECTED TO THE FACT THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS BARRED BY TIME AND THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. FROM THE D E SPATCH REGISTER MAINTAINED BY THE REGISTRY, WE FIND THAT THE APPELLATE ORDER PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN D E SPATCHED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 23/06/2009 ITSELF AND THAT THERE IS NO RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT THE SAID ORDER WAS NOT SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE INCLINED TO DISMISS THE CLAIM OF THE LD. AR AND THE ASSESSEE THAT THE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 27/05/2009 WAS NOT SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE HOL D THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS BARRED BY TIME AS IT IS PREFERRED ON 03/12/2018 AFTER A GAP OF 9 YEARS BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 23 / 10 /201 9 SD/ - ( C.N. PRASAD ) SD/ - (M.BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED 23 / 10 / 2019 M A NO. 707/MUM/2018 M/S. BHALARIA STEEL CORPORATION 3 KARUNA , SR.PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWA RDED TO : BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//