((-1-)) mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.587 OF 2007 M/s.Prime Housewares Limited Appellant versus Commissioner of Income Tax City-IV, Mumbai and another Respondents Mr.N.R.Toprani for appellant. Mr.Vimal Gupta for respondents. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND A.A.KUMBHAKONI, JJ. DATE : 22nd September 2008 PC : 1. Certain questions have been framed in this appeal. Some of the questions are substantial in nature to the extent that this Court has already admitted the appeal with respect to those questions. A consolidated order was passed by the Tribunal with respect to the assessee for the years 2000-2001 and 2001-2002. Though the order was one, two separate appeals were filed in respect of aforesaid two periods. An appeal against the order for the year 2000-2001 came before another Bench and that Bench found that it was a case for remand. ((-2-)) 2. In the light of the arguments made by the counsel at the bar and in the light of the order passed in Income Tax Appeal No.737 of 2007, we frame following question viz. : "Whether the appellant got prejudiced by act of the Tribunal of passing an order in his absence, although he had made an application for adjournment of the case?" 3. Having heard both sides, in view of facts and circumstances of this case, the question is decided in favour of the appellant and the appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh disposal on merit. (BILAL NAZKI, J.) (A.A.KUMBHAKONI, J.)