Shri Hasmukh Himatlal Shah, Ahmedabad V. The Income tax Officer,Ward-15(2), Ahmedabad

MA 92/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8533 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 27-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T SANKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHWINKUMAR R SARAIYA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT, JM AND SHRI A. MOHA N ALANKAMONY, AM) M. A. NO.92/AHD/2012 (IN ITA NO.1559/AHD/2011 AY: 2007-08) HASMUKH HIMATLAL SHAH, A/5, KUNDAN APARTMENT, NR. VSNA BUS STOP, VASNA, AHMEDABAD 380 007 P. A. NO. AGUPS 9900 M VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, VAPI, WARD-15 (2), NATURE VIEW BUILDING, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI ASHWINKUMAR R. SARAIYA, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI T. SANKAR, DR DATE OF HEARING: 27-07-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27-07-2012 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY : THIS MISC. APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING RECALLING OF THE O RDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 16-12-2011 PASSED IN ITA NO.1559/AHD/2011, FO R THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE AFORESAID APPE AL WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL RELYING ON THE DECISION I N THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA (PVT.) LTD., 38 ITD 320. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECEIVED THE NOTICE FOR D ATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL ON 16-12-2011 AND THUS HE WAS PREVENTED FROM COMPLYING WITH THE NOTICE OF HEARING. THE LEARNED AR, THEREFO RE, REQUESTED FOR RECALLING OF THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. MA NO.92/AHD/2012 (IN ITA NO.1559/AHD/2011 AY: 2007-08) HASMUKH HIMATLAL SHAH VS ITO W-15(2), AHMEDABAD 2 3. ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE AS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNE D AR. THE REASON FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE NOTICE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE AS STATED AFORESAID BY THE LEARNED AR SEEMS TO BE JUSTIFIABLE. WE, THEREFORE, ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD NEEDS BE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE ALLOW THE MISC. APPLICAT ION OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY DIRECTED NOT TO SE EK UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT IN THE MATTER. THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO POST THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 18-10-2012. SINCE, THE DATE OF HEARI NG IS COMMUNICATED TO BOTH THE PARTIES IN THE OPEN COURT, NOTICE NEED NOT BE ISSUED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27-07-2012. SD/- SD/- (MUKUL KR. SHRAWAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER LAKSHMIKANT DEKA/ LAKSHMIKANT DEKA/ LAKSHMIKANT DEKA/ LAKSHMIKANT DEKA/- -- - MA NO.92/AHD/2012 (IN ITA NO.1559/AHD/2011 AY: 2007-08) HASMUKH HIMATLAL SHAH VS ITO W-15(2), AHMEDABAD 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION: COVERED MATTER NO DICTATION . 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: 27-07-12 OTHER MEMBER: 3. DATE ON WHICH APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S./P.S.: 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S./P.S.: 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK: 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: