Shri Jayantkumar Parshottambhai Vadodariya, Gondal, Dist. Rajkot V. The ITO, Ward-2 (3) (5), Rajkot

MA 1/RJT/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Jayantkumar Parshottambhai Vadodaria, the appellant, who filed a Miscellaneous Application seeking to quash and set aside an earlier ITAT order and to have the appeal decided afresh. The original appeal was dismissed ex parte due to the appellant's continuous non-appearance and procedural non-compliance, specifically the lack of proper signatures on the paper book as required by Rule 18(3) of the ITAT Rules, 1963. The Tribunal, after considering the materials on record and the absence of the appellant in the MA proceedings, decided to dismiss the MA, citing the appellant's nonchalant approach and lack of serious engagement with the legal process.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 133699 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 14-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2023
• Laws Referred To: ITAT Rules, 1963
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरणआयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट 瀈यायपीठ 瀈यायपीठ瀈यायपीठ 瀈यायपीठ, , , , राजकोट IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Misc.Application No.01/Rjt/2023 IN ITA No.25/RJT/2020 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Jayantkumar Parshottambhai Vadodaria Gondal 9/11, Bhagvatpara Opp: RDC Bank Gondal, Rajkot. PAN : AAXPV 6758 P Vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(5) Rajkot. अपीलाथ / (Appellant) यथ /(Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Ashish Kumar, Pandey, Sr.DR स ु नवाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing : 15/09/2023 घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronouncement: 27/09/2023 आदेश/O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Present MA is filed by the assessee seeking quashing and set aside of the order of the ITAT passed in ITA No.25/RJT/2020 dated 18.1.2013 and to decide the appeal afresh. 2. None remained present at the time of hearing on behalf of the assessee. Nor, the assessee has filed any application for adjournment of the matter. It is to be noted that MA of the assessee was listed for hearing on 25.8.2023 and 15.9.2023 and in none of the occasions, the assessee put his appearance or filed any MA No.01/Ahd/2023 2 application explaining the reason for non-appearance. Therefore, considering the material available on record, and after hearing the ld.DR we proceed to dispose of the assessee’s MA ex parte qua the assessee-applicant. 3. We have gone through the MA filed by the assessee, and find that the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex parte on the ground of non-appearance of the assessee continuously on number of occasions. Further, the paper book filed by him, lacked the proper signature, either from the assessee or their authorized representative, which did not comply with the Rule 18(3) of the ITAT Rules, 1963. While passing the impugned order, the Tribunal indeed took into account the issue raised in the appeal and considered the same in the light of facts emerging out from the orders of appellate authority. However, given the absence of a credible defense from the assessee to counter the finding of the lower authorities, in order for the Tribunal to deviate from the view taken by the Revenue authorities, the Tribunal upheld order of the CIT(A). Even in the proceedings of the MA, the assessee chose not to appear, leaving us with minimal material to adjudicate the MA’s validity also. The contents of MA primarily consisted of vague denials of the Tribunal’s findings in the impugned order, lacking supporting evidence or explanations. The behavior of the assessee in both the appeal and the MA proceedings before the Tribunal appeared to be nonchalant and lacked seriousness. Consequently, we find that the assessee’s approach in both the appeal and the MA proceedings lacks the requisite seriousness and does not warrant any leniency. It is more demonstrative if one looks at the order sheet entries in the respective case files. Thus, we find no valid reason, and indeed no merit in granting the assessee’s requests to MA No.01/Ahd/2023 3 invoke the provisions of section 254(2) and recall the impugned order. Consequently, we reject the MA. 4. In the result, the Misc. Application filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 27 th September, 2023 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad,dated 27/09/2023