KARGIL HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., MUMBAI V. DCIT CIR. 3(3), MUMBAI

MA 80/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3189 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 17-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 19-05-2022
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "H" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA No. 80/MUM/2016 (Arising out of ITA No. 2018/Mum/2003) (Assessment Year: 1998-99) Kargil Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Nirma House, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad [PAN: AAACK4645J] Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 3(3), Mumbai .................. Vs ................ Appellant Respondent Appearances For the Appellant/Assessee For the Respondent/Department : : Shri Dharmesh Shah Shri Milind Chavan Date of conclusion of hearing Date of pronouncement of order : : 20.05.2022 18.08.2022 O R D E R Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member: 1. The Appellant/Assessee has filed the present Miscellaneous Application for rectification of order, dated 15.12.2009, passed in ITA No. 2018/Mum/2003 pertaining to Assessment Year 1998-99. 2. The assessment for the Assessment Year 1998-99 was framed on the Assessee, vide order dated 13.12.2000, under Section 143(3) of the Act. The appeal filed by the Assessee against the assessment order, dated 13.12.2000, was dismissed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-III, Mumbai, vide order, dated 17.01.2003. MA No. 80/Mum/2016 Assessment Year: 1998-99 2 3. Being aggrieved, the Assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal in March 2003. This appeal was dismissed on account of non-prosecution vide ex-parte order, dated 21.09.2006. However, on an application moved by the Assessee the appeal was restored vide order, dated 09.06.2009 passed in MA No. 802/Mum/2008. 4. Thereafter, on 15.12.2009, the appeal was again dismissed for non-prosecution vide ex-parte order dated 15.12.2009. The Assessee has moved the present application for recalling of the ex-parte order dismissing the appeal of the Assessee in limine for non-prosecution. 5. In the present application it has been pleaded that the counsel for the Appellant could not appear on the date fixed for hearing as he was in personal difficulty. Further, copy of the aforesaid order was not served on the Assessee as the Assessee had shifted as his office address from Mumbai to Ahmadabad in 2006. The Assessee collected the order from the office of the Tribunal on 25.11.2015 and thus, came to know that the appeal filed by the Assessee has been dismissed for non-prosecution. The application was opposed by the Ld. Departmental Representative. 6. Rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’) provides as under: "Rule 24. Where, on the day fixed for hearing or on any other date to which the hearing may be adjourned, the appellant does not appear in person or through an authorized representative when the appeal is called on for hearing, the MA No. 80/Mum/2016 Assessment Year: 1998-99 3 Tribunal may dispose of the appeal on merits after hearing the respondent: Provided that where an appeal has been disposed of as provided above and the appellant appears afterwards and satisfies the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for his non-appearance, when the appeal was called on for hearing the Tribunal shall make an order setting aside the ex-pare order and restoring the appeal." 7. We have considered the rival contentions and perused the material on record. The solitary disallowance challenged in the appeal, which was dismissed ex-parte, was the disallowance of interest expenses of INR 7,12,274/-. Since the appeal was not disposed on merits, we deem it just and appropriate to set aside the ex-parte order, dated 15.12.2009, and restore the appeal to its original number. The Assessee directed to file revised Form No. 36 to bring on record the change in address/entity. 8. In view of the above, the present miscellaneous application is allowed and the registry is directed to list the appeal for hearing before regular bench in due course after notice to the parties. Order pronounced on 18.08.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Pramod Kumar) Vice President (Rahul Chaudhary) Judicial Member म ुंबई Mumbai; दिन ुंक Dated : 18.08.2022 Sr.PS/PS MA No. 80/Mum/2016 Assessment Year: 1998-99 4 आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आय क्त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. आयकर आय क्त / CIT 5. दिभ गीय प्रदिदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, म ुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आिेश न स र/ BY ORDER, सत्य दपि प्रदि //True Copy// उप/सह यक पुंजीक र /(Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, म ुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai