HEXAWARE TECHNOLOGIES LTD ( FORMERLY KNOWN AS APTECH LTD), V. ACIT 8(2),

MA 76/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4499 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 25-03-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES H: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D K AGRAWAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJENRA SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.76/MUM/2010 ARISING OUT OF ITA 6805/MUM/2006 FOR AY 2002-03 M/S HEXWARE TECHNOLOGIES LTD, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS APTECH LTD), 152, MILLENIUM BUSINESS PARK, SECTOR 3, BLOCK A, TTC INDL AREA MAHAPE, NAVI MUMBAI -400 710 PAN AABCA 3203 F VS ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX -8(2), MUMBAI (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR APPLICANT: SHRI J D MISTRY FOR RESPONDENT: SHRI T T JACOB ORDER PER RAJENRA SINGH, AM 1. THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE REQUESTING FOR RECALLING OF THE ORDER DATE D 16.11.2009 OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA 6805/MUM/2006. IN THE SAID ORDER, THE TRIBUNAL HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNADMITTED FOR WANT OF REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSE SSEE IN THE M A SUBMITTED THAT NON-REPRESENTATION WAS BECAUSE OF FA CT THAT THE COUNSEL ENGAGED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS BUSY IN THE HIG H COURT AND THE REPRESENTATIVE OF TAX CONSULTANT FIRM WAS THERE AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND HAD REQUESTED FOR ADJOURNMENT, WHICH WAS NOT AL LOWED. NON- REPRESENTATION WAS, THEREFORE, DUE TO REASONABLE CA USE AND, THEREFORE, IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED THAT THE ORDER MAY BE RECALLE D FOR FRESH HEARING. M/S HEXWARE TECHNOLOGIES LTD MA 76/M/2010 2 2. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE ARE SATISFIE D THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON-REPRESENTATION ON BEHA LF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. WE, THEREFOR E, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE RECALL THE ORDER DATED 16.11.2009 AND RESTO RE THE APPEAL TO ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER, WHICH WILL BE HEARD ON 17.6.2010. THE DATE OF HEARING WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRE SENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES, AND THEREFORE, NO FORMAL NOTICE OF HEARING IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRY. 3. IN THE RESULT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 25TH DAY OF MARCH 20 10. SD/- SD/- (D K AGRAWAL) (RAJENRA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER A CCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 25TH MARCH, 2010 . COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT 4. CIT(A)-VIII, MUMBAI. 5. CIT MUMBAI CITY-VIII, MUMBAI. 6. D R H BENCH, MUMBAI. 7. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI *CHAVAN/- M/S HEXWARE TECHNOLOGIES LTD MA 76/M/2010 3 SNO DATE INITIALS 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 19-03-2010 SR.P.S 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 23-03-2010 SR.P.S 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER V.P. 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER A.M 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS SR.P.S 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.P.S 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.P.S 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER