Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Income Tax Addition Made Towards Unsubstantiated Share Capital Is Eligible For Section 80-IC Deduction: Delhi High Court

Ms. Neeta Prakash Ahuja Income Tax Officer - 21(2)(3) 1/141,Nagar Sion-Koliwada Mumbai 400037 Vs. Pratyakshkar Bhavan Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai 400051
June, 25th 2014
               IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                          "B" Bench, Mumbai

                Before Shri D. Manmohan, Vice President
               and Shri Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member

                           MA No. 33/Mum/2014
                  (Arising out of ITA No. 8735/Mum/2010)
                         (Assessment Year: 2002-03)

      Ms. Neeta Prakash Ahuja       Income Tax Officer - 21(2)(3)
      1/141, New S.S.S. Nagar       Pratyakshkar Bhavan
                                Vs.
      Sion-Koliwada                 Bandra Kurla Complex
      Mumbai 400037                 Mumbai 400051
                          PAN - AACPA2241J
              Applicant                     Respondent

                   Applicant by:      Shri M. Subramanian
                   Respondent by:     Shri Satyanarayan Raju

                   Date of Hearing:       20.062014
                   Date of Pronouncement: 20.06.2014

                                  ORDER

Per D. Manmohan, V.P.

     By this miscellaneous application the assessee seeks recall of the
exparte order dated 22nd January, 2013 on the ground that on account of
inadvertent typographical error the address of the assessee was mentioned
as 1/4 S.S.S. Nagar instead of 1/141, S.S.S. Nagar, which resulted in non-
receipt of the notice issued by the Registry resulting in non-appearance on
the part of the assessee. It was also contended that the assessee is very
much interested in pursuing the appeal and, therefore, under Rule 24 of the
Appellate Tribunal Rules requested for recall of the exparte order.






2.    We have heard both the parties and perused the record. Having regard
to the circumstances of the case we are of the view that it is a fit case for
recall of the exparte order under Rule 24 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules.
Accordingly we recall the order and direct the Registry to post the appeal for
fresh hearing on 29.10.2014. Since the date is announced in the open court,
notice to the parties is dispensed with.
                                         2                   MA No. 33/Mum/2014
                                                           Ms. Neeta Prakash Ahuja

3.        In the result, the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee is
allowed.






Order pronounced in the open court on 20th June, 2014.

                    Sd/-                                   Sd/-
               (Sanjay Arora)                         (D. Manmohan)
            Accountant Member                         Vice President

Mumbai, Dated:20th June, 2014

Copy to:

     1.   The   Appellant
     2.   The   Respondent
     3.   The   CIT(A) ­ 32, Mumbai
     4.   The   CIT­ 21, Mumbai City
     5.   The   DR, "B" Bench, ITAT, Mumbai
                                                        By Order

//True Copy//
                                                     Assistant Registrar
                                             ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai
n.p.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting