PRADEEP SURESH KRIPLANI, MUMBAI. V. ITO (IT)- 3 (1)(1), MUMBAI

MA 83/MUM/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3476 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 14-07-2022
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 28-03-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RADHA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C" BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MA.No. 83/MUM/2022 [ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 5968/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15)] Shri Pradeep Kriplani C/o. DHJ Legal 804, Vikas Centre Junction of SL Road and NS Road Mulund (W), Mumbai - 400080 PAN: DOZPK3245F v. Income Tax Officer (IT)-3(1)(1) Room No. 1628, 16 th Floor Air India Building Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Radha Department by : Mahita Nair Date of Hearing : 15.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 21.07.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. Through this Miscellaneous Application assessee is seeking for recall of the exparte order passed by the Tribunal in ITA.No. 5968/Mum/2018 dated 24.02.2022. 2. At the time of hearing, Ld. AR submitted that non-appearance of the assessee on the date of hearing was not due to negligence on its part 2 MA.No. 83/MUM/2022 Shri Pradeep Kriplani nor any willful default but was solely due to the reason beyond the control of the assessee. Ld. AR filed an affidavit mentioning the reasons for non-appearance on the date of hearing which is reproduced below: - “1. That I am a citizen of India. I am in employment with M/s. HI- CHOICE, a company based in Central Africa for a very long time. Initially, I was working as sales executive and later on I was promoted to the post of manager. Not being well educated and being just SSC (10th Pass), I am not very well versed with the Intricacies of Indian Income Tax Laws. 2. That since I was not residing in India, all my Income Tax matters pertaining to India were handled by one M/s. Kamal Sangtani & Co., my then Chartered Accountant from India. I was under the honest impression that all my income tax matters were being well handled by M/s. Kamal Sangtani & Co. 3. That I had preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai against CIT(A)'s Order dated 31.05.2018 for AY 2014- 15 and while filing Form 36, the address mentioned for the purpose of communication of notices belonged to M/s. Kamal Sangtani & Co. Thus, all the notices might be received by M/s. Kamal Sangtani & Co. 4. That since I am still in Central Africa I was under the impression that my appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai is being duly attended by M/s. Kamal Sangtani & Co. or any counsel appointed by them. However, as I could not get any response from them, I approached another consultant Mr. Harish H. Soni & Co. for my matter 5. That's when my current consultant checked the case status online, they informed me that an ex-parte order was passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai on 24.02.2022 dismissing my appeal.” In view of above submissions, Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for recall of the exparte order in the interest of the justice as there is sufficient cause for non-appearance of the assessee. Further, Ld. AR also filed revised form 36 with the present communication address, so that the assessee can receive future communications. 3 MA.No. 83/MUM/2022 Shri Pradeep Kriplani 3. On the other hand, Ld. DR did not make any objections for recall of the order. 4. Considering the submissions of both the parties and verifying the records and the contents of the affidavit filed along with Miscellaneous Application, we are of the view that the appeal should be recalled and an opportunity to the assessee to represent his case should be given to meet the principle of natural justice. Thus, we recall the exparte order passed by the Tribunal in ITA.No. 5968/Mum/2018 dated 24.02.2022. The Registry is directed to post the appeal for hearing in due course after issuing notice to both parties. 5. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 21 st July, 2022 Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai / Dated 21.07.2022 Giridhar, Sr.PS 4 MA.No. 83/MUM/2022 Shri Pradeep Kriplani Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), Mumbai. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mum