PANKAJ JAI,MUMBAI V. DCIT CC 1(1), MUMBAI

MA 605/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Praveen Kumar Jain and Shri Pankaj Jain, who filed Miscellaneous Applications (MAs) against the exparte orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the assessment years 2008-09 to 2014-15. The applications were filed due to the non-appearance of the assessee's authorized representative, Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, at the hearing on 19/01/2023, attributed to an inadvertent oversight in noting the date. The Tribunal considered the circumstances and allowed the applications, setting aside the exparte orders for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 40368 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HEMANSHU JOSHI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJIV KHANDELWAL

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER MA Nos.594/Mum/2023 to 600/Mum/2023 (Arising out of ITA Nos.7191/Mum/2018 to 7197/Mum/2018 (Assessment Year :2008-09 to 2014-15) Shri Praveen Kumar Jain Flat No.504, Pawan Indraprastha Building Satya Nagar Borivali West Mumbai – 400 092 Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(1) Room No.903, 9th Floor Pratishta Bhavan (Old CGO Building (Annexe) M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 PAN/GIR No.AADPJ5102D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) MA Nos.601/Mum/2023 to 605/Mum/2023 (Arising out of ITA Nos.4977/Mum/2019 to 4981/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year :2008-09 to 2009-10 & 2012-13 to 2014-15) Shri Pankaj Jain Flat No.504, Pawan Indraprastha Building Satya Nagar Borivali West Mumbai – 400 092 Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(1) Room No.903, 9th Floor Pratishta Bhavan (Old CGO Building (Annexe) M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 PAN/GIR No.ADZPJ7866P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) MA Nos.594/Mum/2013 and others Praveen Kumar Jain and Others 2 Assessee by Shri Rajiv Khandelwal (Virtually Present) Revenue by Shri Hemanshu Joshi Date of Hearing 13/12/2024 Date of Pronouncement 29/01/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): In the aforesaid Miscellaneous Applications it has been stated that the Tribunal vide consolidated order dated 19/01/2023 for the A.Yrs.2008-09 to 2014-15 has passed an exparte order. 2. It has been stated that assessee’s authorised representative Shri Rajiv Khandelwal could not appear on the date of hearing on 19/01/2023 as inadvertently, he did not note the date of hearing in his diary. In the Miscellaneous Application assessee has stated as under:- “2 The Honourable Tribunal has decided the appeal of the applicant ex-parte for the reasons mentioned in paragraph no 18 of the impugned order. The Applicant submits that the Authorised Representative, Mr Rajiv Khandelwal could not appear on the date of hearing on 19th January, 2023 inasmuch as he, inadvertently, did not note the said date of hearing in his appointment diary. 3 The Applicant submits that on 12th December, 2022 that is, the date of hearing before the last date of hearing of 19th January, 2023, the adjournment was sought by Ms Sanchita Gurav, and not by the Authorised Representative, and due to some communication gap, the adjourned date was not informed MA Nos.594/Mum/2013 and others Praveen Kumar Jain and Others 3 to the Authorised Representative, resultantly, the Authorised Representative did not note the same in his appointment diary It is pertinent to note that on the date of hearing that is, 19th January, 2023, the Authorised Representative had another matter of Mrs Pallavi Gandhi (ITA No 2251/Mum/2022) before the same Bench and an adjournment was sought for the reason that the Authorised Representative was unwell, and the said adjournment request had been acceded to by the Honourable Bench. Thus, if the date of hearing would have been noted in the case of the Applicant, the Authorised Representative would have requested for an adjournment in this matter too, as he was unwell.” 3. Since, it is an exparte order and there was a reasonable cause, as assessee’s authorised representative could not appear for the aforesaid reasons, therefore, in the interest of justice, the exparte order passed by the Tribunal is recalled for fresh hearing. The Registry is directed to fix the hearing of the appeals in the month of March 2025. Accordingly, all the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee are allowed. 4. In the result, all the Miscellaneous Applications of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced on 29th January,2025. Sd/- (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) Sd/- (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 29/01/2025 KARUNA, sr.ps MA Nos.594/Mum/2013 and others Praveen Kumar Jain and Others 4 Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// "