Bloom Decor Pvt.Ltd.,, Ahmedabad v. The Dy.CIT., Ahmedabad Circle-1,, Ahmedabad

MA 121/AHD/2010 | 2002-2003
Pronouncement Date: 27-08-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 12120524 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAACB6221B
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number MA 121/AHD/2010
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 9 day(s)
Appellant Bloom Decor Pvt.Ltd.,, Ahmedabad
Respondent The Dy.CIT., Ahmedabad Circle-1,, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 27-08-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 27-08-2010
Assessment Year 2002-2003
Appeal Filed On 18-05-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI JM AND N. S. SAINI AM ) M. A. NO.121 AND 122/AHD/2010 (IN C. O. NOS. 72 AND 73/AHD/2006 - A. Y.: 2002-03 AND 2003-04) BLOOM DCOR PVT. LTD. 2 ND FLOOR SUMEL OPP. GNFC INFO TOWER S. G. HIGHWAY THALTEJ AHMEDABAD VS THE D. C. I. T. CIRCLE-1 3 RD FLOOR JITENDRA CHAMBER R. B. I. LANE ASHRAM ROAD AHMEDABAD PA NO. AAACB 6221 B (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY SHRI KISHAN MEHTA AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI K. MADHUSUDAN DR O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI: BOTH THE MISC. APPLICATIONS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR RECALLING THE EARLIER ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 01-04-2010 WHEREBY BOTH THE CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE DISMISSED IN DEFAULT. 2. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E PARTIES. 3. THE RECORDS SHOW THAT BOTH THE CROSS OBJECTIONS WERE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 01-04-2010. NOTICE WAS DULY SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE THROUGH REGISTERED POST. THE A/D CARD DULY SERVED U PON THE ASSESSEE IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT WAS NOTED IN THE ORDER DATE D 01-04-2010 BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS INTIMATED THE DEFECT S IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS AS SEVERAL DOCUMENTS IN THE CROSS OBJECT IONS WERE NOT FILED. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECTIFY THE DEFECTS IN THE CRO SS OBJECTIONS. THE NOTICE OF THE REGISTRY WAS NOT COMPLIED WITH. THE C ROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED VIDE ORDER DATE D 01-04-2010. MA NO.121 AND 122/AHD/2010 (IN C. O. NO. 72 AND 73/AHD/2007) BLOOM DCOR PVT. LTD. VS DCIT CIR 1 AHMEDABAD 2 4. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE TENDERED UN CONDITIONAL APOLOGY FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON THE DATE OF HEARING B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE WAS OUT OF AHMEDABAD ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND THAT REQUEST F OR ADJOURNMENT WAS WRONGLY FORWARDED FOR BENCH B INSTEAD OF BENCH A WHERE THE MATTER WAS LISTED FOR HEARING. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE C ONCERN PERSON WHO WAS TO APPEAR ALSO FELL ILL AND COULD NOT ATTEND HE ARING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE UNDE R TOOK TO REMOVE ALL THE DEFECTS IN CASE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS GIVEN T O THE ASSESSEE TO ARGUE THE CROSS OBJECTIONS ON MERIT. ON THE OTHER HAND L EARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE CROSS OBJECTIONS WERE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING EARLIER AND EVEN ON EARLIER OCCASION WHENEVER MATTER WAS TAKEN UP FOR H EARING THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REMAINED OUT OF AHMEDABAD. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE DEFECTS IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS HAVE ALSO NOT BEEN REMOVED THEREFORE BOTH THE MISC. APPLICATIONS MAY BE DISMI SSED. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE AGREE WITH THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LEARNED DR THAT EVEN ON EARLIER OCCASIONS WHENEVER THE MATTER WAS T AKEN UP FOR HEARING THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REMAINED OUTSI DE AHMEDABAD. NO REASON HAS BEEN EXPLAINED WHY THE LEARNED COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR ON THE DATE OF HEARING. THE RECORD S ALSO REVEALS THAT REGISTRY ISSUED DEFECT MEMO TO THE ASSESSEE TO REMO VE THE DEFECTS IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS BUT THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN RECTIFI ED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT APPEARS THAT APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED BEFORE B BENCH BUT NOBODY APPEARED ON THE DATE OF HEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. NO EVIDENCE IS ALSO FILED AS TO WHO WAS THE CONCERN PE RSON WAS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND NO EVIDENCE FOR HIS ALLEGED ILLNESS IS ALSO FILED. THEREFORE VAGUE AVERMENTS ARE CONTAINED IN THE MIS C. APPLICATIONS AND THE DEFECTS HAVE NOT BEEN REMOVED IN THE CROSS OBJE CTIONS. HOWEVER WE MAY NOTE THAT THE CROSS OBJECTIONS HAVE NOT BEEN DE CIDED ON MERITS AND MA NO.121 AND 122/AHD/2010 (IN C. O. NO. 72 AND 73/AHD/2007) BLOOM DCOR PVT. LTD. VS DCIT CIR 1 AHMEDABAD 3 THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS UNDERTAKEN BEFORE US TO REMOVE THE DEFECTS IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS THEREFORE IN OUR VIEW ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO ARGUE THE CROSS OBJECTIONS COULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE SUBJECT TO COST TO THE OTHER SIDE. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS AND THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS WE RECALL OUR EARLIER ORDER DATE D 01-04-2010 AND RESTORE THE CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THEIR ORIGINAL NUMBER SUBJECT TO COST OF RS.3 000/- IN EACH MISC. APPLICATION. TH E ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO REMOVE THE DEFECTS IN THE CROSS OBJECTI ONS WITHIN ONE MONTH FROM THE DATE OF ORDER. THE COST SHALL BE PAID TO T HE REVENUE DEPARTMENT WITHIN ONE MONTH FROM THE DATE OF ORDER. THE OFFICE IS DIRECTED TO FIX BOTH THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FOR HEARING ON MERIT ON 28-10- 2010 FOR WHICH NO SEPARATE NOTICE WILL BE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT BOTH THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED SUBJECT TO COST ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27-08-2010 SD/- SD/- (N. S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 27-08-2010 LAKSHMIKANT/- 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