Gigabyte Technology (India) P. Ltd., Navi Mumbai v. Asstt. Comm. Of Income Tax Circle 1, Margao

MA 16/PAN/2013 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2013 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 1624124 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AABCD7556N
Bench Panaji
Appeal Number MA 16/PAN/2013
Duration Of Justice 1 month(s) 8 day(s)
Appellant Gigabyte Technology (India) P. Ltd., Navi Mumbai
Respondent Asstt. Comm. Of Income Tax Circle 1, Margao
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 25-10-2013
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 25-10-2013
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 16-09-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH PANAJI BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI D.T. GARASIA HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER MA NO. 16 & 17/PNJ/2013 ( ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 51&52/PNJ/2012 ) : (ASST. YEAR : 2006 - 07) GIGABYTE TECHNOLOGY (INDIA) PVT. LTD. B - 411 BSEL TECH PARK SECTOR 30 - A VASHI MAHARASHTRA PAN : AABCD7556N (APPLICANT) VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1 MARGAO GOA (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SANDEEP BHANDARE CA RESPONDENT BY : AMRITRAJ SINGH DR DATE OF HEARING : 25/10/2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25/10/2013 O R D E R PER P.K. BANSAL : 1. THE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED THE ABOVE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FOR RECALLING THE ORDER PASSED BY THIS TRIBUNAL U/S 254(1) VIDE RESPECTIVE ORDERS DT. 11.6.2013. THE TRIBUNAL HAS PASSED THE ORDER EX PARTE IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE DELHI TRIBUNAL IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL) IN THE CASE OF CIT V. MUL T IPLAN INDIA LTD. AS NOBODY APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE LD. AR BEFORE US CONTENDED THAT THE APPELLANT COULD NOT APPEAR ON THE SAID DATE OF HEARING AS THE NOTICE DT. 8.5.2013 WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 13.6.2013 I.E. AFTER THE DATE OF THE HEARING. A COPY OF THE ENVELOPE MENTIONING THE DATE OF THE RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE ALONGWITH THE NOTICE WAS ALSO FILED BEFORE US ALONGWITH THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION. AN AFFIDAVIT IN THIS REGARD WAS ALSO FILED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. 2 MA NOS. 16 & 17/PNJ/2013 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS. 51&52/PNJ/2012) 3. THE LD. DR WAS FAIR ENOUGH TO CONCEDE THE POSITION. 4. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERING THE SAME WE NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO ATTEND THE HEARING ON 11.6.2013 WHEN BOTH THE APPEALS WERE FIXED AND DISPOSED OFF BY THIS TRIBUNAL EX PARTE BUT NOT ON MERIT. WE THEREFORE RE - CALL BOTH THE APPEALS. REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO FIX BOTH THE APPEALS IN D UE COURSE. 5. IN THE RESULT BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25.10.2013. SD/ - (D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - (P.K. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE : PANAJI / GOA DATED : 25/10/ 2013 *SSL* COPY TO : (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT CONCERNED (4) CIT(A) CONCERNED (5) D.R (6) GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER SR. P RIVATE S ECRETARY ITAT PANAJI GOA