MAs 90 to 92 recall. IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad B Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member MA No. & Appellant Respondent A.Y ITA No. 90/H/2019 Bandho Real Dy. CIT, Central 2012-13 (1885/H/2018) Estates P Ltd Circle 2(4) Chennai Hyderabad PAN:AADCB6321M 91/H/2019 Dream Land -do- 2015-16 (1889/H/2018) Ventures P Ltd Bangalore PAN:AACCD1047P 92/H/2019 Bhuvanesh Infra -do- 2012-13 (1890/H/2018) Ventures P Ltd Vijayawada PAN:AADCB4435E Assessee by: Sri M.V. Prasad Revenue by: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, CIT-DR Date of hearing: 06/09/2019 Date of pronouncement: 16/09/2019 ORDER Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. All these M.As are filed by respective assessees for recall of orders of Tribunal dated 22/02/2019 under Rule 24 of ITAT Rules by making following submissions: 1. above mentioned appeal is instituted against order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Hyderabad Dt 16.03.2018. appellant company belongs to Agri Gold Group. 2. Hon'ble ITAT, Hyderabad has dismissed appeal on 22.02.2019 citing reason as none was appeared on behalf of appellant Company and for want of prosecution. 3. appellant company has filed appeal before Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Page 1 of 3 MAs 90 to 92 recall. (Hyderabad) on 14.09.2018 along with condonation of delay for period of 103 days. 4. appellant company has received defective notice dated 26.09.2018 seeking to file revised condonation petition with corrections and given 10 days time from receipt thereof. 5. authorized representative of appellant company prepared revised condonation petition and sent for signature of director of appellant company. As directors of Agri Gold Group were in judicial custody including directors of appellant company at Eluru District Jail, Eluru, getting signatures from directors were delayed. When assistant of Authorized representative approached jail authorities, sometimes directors are not available due to fact that they are taken to courts for hearing to different places and sometimes jail authorities not allowed to contact directors. Hence delay was happened in obtaining signatures. In this process filing of revised condonation petition was also delayed 6. As directors are in judicial custody delay is beyond control of appellant company. 7. appellant company has obtained signature from Director as per Board resolution dated 26.03.2018. 8. As stated above, petitioner was prevented by sufficient cause for not appearing on date of hearing of appeal. 9. Prayer: In terms of Rule 24 of Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, appellant company respectfully prays Hon'ble ITAT, Hyderabad that ex- parte order Dated 22.02.2019 may kindly be set aside and appeal may be restored for hearing in interests of substantial justice. Inconvenience caused is sincerely regretted . 2. learned Counsel for assessee reiterated submissions made above and learned DR was also heard. Page 2 of 3 MAs 90 to 92 recall. 3. Considering fact that assessee was prevented by reasonable cause for not appearing before Tribunal and for not rectifying mistakes pointed out in defect notice, we are inclined to recall order of Tribunal dated 22.02.2019 and fix appeal for hearing on 12.12.2019. M.As filed by assessees are accordingly allowed. 4. In result, M.As. filed by assessees are allowed. Order pronounced in Open Court on 16th September, 2019. Sd/- Sd/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 16th September, 2019. Vinodan/sps Copy to: 1 Bandho Real Estates P Ltd Chennai, Bhuvanesh Infra Ventures P Ltd Vijayawada C/o M.V. Prasad, C.A. D.No.60-07-13, 4th Line, Siddhartha Nagar, Vijayawada 52001 2 DCIT, Central Circle 2(4) 6TH Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad 3 CIT (A)-12 Hyderabad 4 Pr. CIT 12 Hyderabad 5 DR, ITAT Hyderabad 6 Guard File By Order Page 3 of 3 Bandho Real Estates P Ltd. v. Dy. CIT, Central Circle-2(4), Hyderabad