IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.737 OF 2007 TAX APPEAL NO.737 OF 2007 TAX APPEAL NO.737 OF 2007 M/s Prime Housewares Ltd.. Appellant Vs. 1. Commissioner of Income Tax city IV & ors ... Respondents Mr.P.R.Toprani for Appellant Ms.P.P.Bhosale for Respondents CORAM CORAM CORAM : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and A.V.Nirgude, A.V.Nirgude, A.V.Nirgude, JJ JJ JJ DATE DATE DATE : 23rd June, 2008. : 23rd June, 2008. : 23rd June, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents. Ms.P.P.Bhosale undertakes to file vakalatnama in the above matter within a period of two weeks from today. Undertaking accepted. 2. We have perused the order of the tribunal dt. 26.10.2006. We find that the tribunal has decided the matter ex parte. Even though a letter was filed by the Assessee’s C.A. seeking a short adjournment, the tribunal proceeded to decide only on the basis of our judgment in Indian Rayon Corpn vs CIT (261 ITR 98). Mr.Toprani strongly contended that the said judgment strictly does not apply to the facts and circumstances of the above case and the assessee was not afforded an 2 opportunity of fair hearing to point the same before the tribunal. 3. Under these circumstances, we are inclined to quash and set aside the order dt. 26.10.2006 only on this limited ground and remand the matter back to the I.T.A.T. to hear the above appeal strictly on its own merits and in accordance with law. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. {A.V.Nirgude, {A.V.Nirgude, {A.V.Nirgude, } } } (Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, (Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, (Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J} J} J}