Vaishnav S Puri (HUF) Prop. M/s of Kaks International NCL Bldg, 8th floor, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400051 Vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax 19(3), Piramal Chambers, 3rd Floor, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400012
December, 15th 2014
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "F" BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE HON'BLE S/SHRI D. MANMOHAN , VICE-PRESIDENT
AND B.R.BASKARAN (AM)
, . , .. ,
Miscellaneous Application No.396/Mum/2014
(Arising out of ./I.T.A. No.3259/Mum/2013)
( / Assessment Year:2009-10)
Vaishnav S Puri (HUF) / Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax
Prop. M/s of Kaks International Vs. 19(3),
NCL Bldg, 8th floor, Piramal Chambers,
Bandra Kurla Complex, 3rd Floor, Lalbaug,
Bandra (E), Parel,
( /Appellant) .. ( / Respondent)
. / . /PAN/GIR No. : AACHP9479A
/ Appellant by : Ms.Asifa Khan
/Respondent by : Shri Vivek Batra
/ Date of Hearing
/Date of Pronouncement : 12.12.2014
/ O R D E R
Per B.R.BASKARAN, Accountant Member:
The assessee has filed this application seeking the recall of the ex-parte
order dated 20.8.2014 passed in the hands of the assessee in
ITANo.3259/Mum/2013 relating to assessment year 2009-10.
2. The ld. counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the present
appeal was fixed for hearing for the first time on 31.7.2014 and on that date she
appeared before the bench and took the adjournment. Accordingly, the case
was adjourned to 18.8.2014. However on that date of hearing, her mother fell
sick and hence she could not appear before the Bench for hearing. The ld. AR
submitted that non-appearance on the date of hearing was for the reasons
2 MA No.396/Mum/2014
beyond the control of the authorized representative and not due to the
negligence on the part of the assessee. The ld. counsel further submitted that
Tribunal had decided an identical issue against the assessee for the assessment
year 2006-07 and the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High
Court of Bombay. Hence, the assessee is intending to file a declaration u/s
158A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) for the year under consideration in
order to avoid multiplicity of the appeals. She submitted that the assessee would
be put to great loss, if the present miscellaneous application is not considered
favourably. Accordingly, the AR submitted that there was a reasonable cause
for the assessee for not appearing before the Bench on the date of hearing.
Accordingly, she prayed for recall of the order.
3. We have heard the ld. DR and perused the record. Having regard to the
submissions made by the ld. AR, we are of the view that there was a reasonable
cause for the assessee for not appearing before the bench on the date of
hearing. Accordingly, in exercise of the powers given to the Bench under Rule
24 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, we recall the order dated 20.8.2014 referred
supra. We also direct the registry to post this appeal for final hearing on
19.01.2015. Since the date of hearing is announced in the open court in the
presence of both the parties, they may note that the registry shall not sent any
formal notice of hearing to them, i.e. present order shall also be considered as
notice of hearing.
4. In the result, the misc. application filed by the assessee is allowed.
The above order was pronounced in the open court on 12th Dec, 2014.
12th Dec, 2014
(. /D. MANMOHAN) (.. ,/ B.R. BASKARAN)
/VICE- PRESIDENT /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai: 12 Dec,2014.
. ../ SRL , Sr. PS
3 MA No.396/Mum/2014
/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. / The Appellant
2. / The Respondent.
3. () / The CIT(A)- concerned
4. / CIT concerned
5. , , /
DR, ITAT, Mumbai concerned
6. / Guard file.
/ BY ORDER,
, /ITAT, Mumbai