K.Sreeramulu, Madanpalle, Madanapalle V. ITO, Ward-1, Madanpalle, Madanapalle

MA 10/HYD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4504 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 04-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B KURMI NAIDU
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMA RAO
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

MA NO 10 OF 2016 K SREERAMULU MADANPALLE PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO.10/HYD/2016 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.412/HYD/2009) (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06) SHR I K. SREERAMULU (HUF) MADANAPALLE, CHITTOOR VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 MADANAPALLE (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI S. RAMA RAO FOR REVENUE : SHRI B. KURMI NAIDU, DR DATE OF HEARING : 01.04.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEME NT : 06 .07.2016 O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION IS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE U/S 254(2) OF THE ACT SEEKING RECALL OF THE ORDER OF TH E TRIBUNAL DATED 21.06.2013. IN THIS APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS S UBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS SERVED ON THE PETITIONER O NLY ON 07.01.2008 AS PER THE WRITTEN ENTRIES AND REMARKS P LACED BY THE POST OFFICE OFFICIALS, WHEREAS THE ASSESSMENT NOT O NLY OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN COMPLETED BY 31.12.2007, BUT ALSO OUGHT T O HAVE BEEN SERVED ON THE PETITIONER BY 31.12.2007. THUS, ACCOR DING TO THE ASSESSEE, THE SERVICE OF THE SAID ASSESSMENT ORDER ON 07.01.2008 IS IN VIOLATION OF THE ACT AND ALSO BARRED BY LIMIT ATION AND THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED ON THE MERITS OF THE ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOULD BE RE CALLED AND ADJUDICATED AFRESH. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS IN THE ABOVE PETITION, W HILE THE LEARNED DR OPPOSED THE SAME. MA NO 10 OF 2016 K SREERAMULU MADANPALLE PAGE 2 OF 2 2. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, IT IS S EEN FROM THE RECORD AND ALSO AS PER THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESS EE THAT THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) ON 26.12.200 7 BY RAISING A DEMAND OF RS.8,38,559. IT IS ONLY THE CON TENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS SERVED ON TH E ASSESSEE ON 07.01.2008 BY THE POSTAL DEPARTMENT. NO DOCUMENT ARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE SAME HAS BEEN FILED ALON G WITH THE ABOVE APPLICATION, EXCEPT FOR THE AFFIDAVIT AFFIRMI NG THE AVERMENTS IN THE APPLICATION. FURTHER, WE ALSO FIND THAT NO S UCH GROUND WAS RAISED IN THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, WE SEE NO MERIT IN THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR RECALL OF THE ORDER AND ACCORDINGLY THE MISCALLANEOUS APPLICATION IS DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, M.A. FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 TH JULY, 2016. S D/ - S D/ - ( B. RAMAKOTAIAH ) ( P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 6 TH JULY, 2016. VNODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1. SHRI K. SREE RAMULU (HUF), PROP: SAI KRISHNA MULTIN ED FILATURE SILK REARING UNIT DEVATHA NAGAR, MADNAPALL E, CHITTOOR 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 MADNAPALLE 3. CIT(A) TIRUPATHI 4. CIT TIRUPATI CHARGE, TIRUPATHI 5. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER