JAMANADAS FINENCIAL & INVESTMENT CO. LTD., Jaipur V. ACIT, Jaipur

MA 11/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2329 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 1992-1993
• Appeal Filed On: 22-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S L PODDAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

MA NO. 11/JP/2014 M/S. JAMNADAS FINANCIAL & INVESTMENT CO. LTD. VS. ACIT , COMPANY CIRCLE- 1, JAIPUR 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR (BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI T.R. ME ENA) M.A. NO.11/JP/2014 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 185/JP/2002) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 1992-93 PAN : AAACJ 4622 N M/S. JAMNADAS FINANCIAL & INVESTMENT CO. LTD. VS. THE ACIT 4, SATYA VIHAR, LAL KOTHI COMPANY CIRCLE- 1 JAIPUR JAIPUR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.L. PODDAR DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI RAJESH OJHA DATE OF HEARING: 12-09-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12-09-2014 ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION U/S 254 (2) OF THE ACT AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 03-08-2 005 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1992-93 CONTENDING THAT FOLLOWING MISTAKE HAS CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THE ITAT WHICH SHOULD BE RECTIFIED U/S 254(2) OF THE AC T. THE ABOVE MENTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN DECIDED BY TH E HON'BLE BENCH VIDE THEIR ORDER DATED 03-08-2005. T HE ORDER WAS PASSED EX-PARTE WITHOUT SERVING ANY NOTICE TO T HE ASSESSEE OR HIS COUNSEL. THE EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT WAS PASSED I T CAME TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS COUNSEL ONLY IN SEPTEMBER, 2013 WHEN THE DEPARTMENT PURSUE FOR THE RECOVERY OF THE DEMAND THEN THE ASSESSEE APPLIED FOR CERTIFI ED COPY OF THE MA NO. 11/JP/2014 M/S. JAMNADAS FINANCIAL & INVESTMENT CO. LTD. VS. ACIT , COMPANY CIRCLE- 1, JAIPUR 2 JUDGEMENT WHICH WAS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE ONLY I N THE MONTH OF DECEMBER, 2013. THEREFORE, IT WAS NEITHER IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE A SSESSEE COMPANY NOR IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF ASSESSEE'S COUNSEL. NO NOTICE WAS SERVED TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, YOU ARE REQU ESTED TO RESTORE THE APPEAL AND OBLIGE. 2.1 THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT NEITHER THE NOTICE OF HEARING NOR THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITAT WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY ITAT SUFFER S FROM THIS MISTAKE OF NOT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASS ESSEE AND IT MAY BE RECALLED. 2.2 THE LD. DR CONTENDS THAT THE NOTICE WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AND WRONG AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN FILED. 2.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORD, WE F IND THAT ON 07-07-2005 AT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE'S COUNSEL SHRI ANIL MAT HUR OF MATHUR & CO. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE C ASE FOR 02-08-2005 WAS GIVEN. THIS APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS GIVEN O N THE LETTER HEAD OF MATHUR & CO. BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SHRI ANI L MATHUR AND THE DATE WAS NOTED FOR THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING I.E. 02-08-2 005 BY THEM. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT NO NOTICE OF HEARING MA NO. 11/JP/2014 M/S. JAMNADAS FINANCIAL & INVESTMENT CO. LTD. VS. ACIT , COMPANY CIRCLE- 1, JAIPUR 3 WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. IT IS APPARENT FROM RECO RD THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS PROPERLY GIVEN AT THE REQUEST OF THE AS SESSEE'S COUNSEL. THUS THERE IS NO MISTAKE AS POINTED OUT IN THE MISCELLAN EOUS APPLICATION. THEREFORE, THE SAME IS REJECTED. 3.0 IN THE RESULT, THE M.A. OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12-09-2014 . SD/- SD/- (T.R. MEENA) (R.P. TOLANI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED: 12 TH SEPT 2014 *MISHRA COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. M/S. JAMNADAS FINANCIAL& INVESTMENT CO. LTD. , J AIPUR 2. THE ACIT, CIRCLE- 1, JAIPUR 3. THE LD. CIT BY ORDER 4. THE LD. CIT(A), JAIPUR 5..THE LD. DR 6.THE GUARD FILE (MA NO. 11/JP/2014) AR ITAT, JAIPUR