Sh. Narinder Kumar, Mandi V. ITO, Mandi

MA 121/CHANDI/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6161 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-01-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 12-10-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAI SHREE SHARMA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI D.K.SRIVASTAVA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO. 121/CHD/2009 (IN ITA NO. 723/CHD/2004) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02 SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, VS. THE ITO, WARD-1, PROP M/S HIM AGRICULTURE & MANDI ENGINEERING, LUNAPANI, MANDI (HP) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SMT.JAISHREE SHARMA ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THE APPLICANT IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE TRIB UNAL DATED 8.12.2006 AGAINST THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN I TA NO. 723/CHD/2004 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 2. DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHA LF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN FILED WITH A REQUEST TO CONSIDER THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AS THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENT ATIVE IS UNABLE TO APPEAR DUE TO ILL HEALTH. 2 3. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE APPLICANT IN THE PRESENT MI SC. APPLICATION IS THAT BY AN ERROR TWO ORDERS ONE DATED 8.12.2006 AND THE SECOND DATED 9.12.2006 HAVE BEEN PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE S AME ITA NO.723/CHD/2004. 4. FROM THE PERUSAL OF RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE REV ENUE HAD PREFERRED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON TWO GROUND S OF DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 93,721/- AND RS. 1,94,735/-. THE T RIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 9.12.2005 IN ITA NO. 723/CHD/2004 HAD DECIDED THE APPEAL EX- PARTE, UPHOLDING BOTH THE ADDITIONS OF RS. 93,721/- AND RS. 1,94,735/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HAD SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE THEREAFTER HAD FILED A MISC. APPLICATION F OR RECALLING THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER IN MA NO. 171/CHD/2006 DATED 16.6.2006 HAD RECALLED THE EX-PA RTE ORDER PASSED BY IT AND PLACED IT FOR HEARING. THE TRIBUNAL THEREAFTER VIDE ORDER IN ITA NO. 723/CHD/2004 DATED 8.12.2006 HAD UPHELD THE ADDITIO N OF RS. 93,721/- AND DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,94,135/-. THE SECOND ORDER DATED 8.12.2006 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS THE FINAL ORDER WHICH WAS PASSED AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE AND THE COUNSELS FOR THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE ABOVE SAID CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND NO MERI T IN THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE ALLEGING TH AT IN ITA NO. 723/CHD/2004, TWO ORDERS HAVE BEEN PASSED. THE ORD ER DATED 8.12.2006 IS THE FINAL ORDER IN THE AFORESAID APPEAL AND CONSEQU ENTLY THE MISC. APPLICATION MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE IS MISCONCEIVED A ND THE SAME IS DISMISSED. 3 M.A. NO. 121/CHD/2009 (IN ITA NO. 723/CHD/2004) 4. IN THE RESULT MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 11 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2011. SD/- SD/- (D.K.SRIVASTAVA) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 11 TH FEBRUARY, 2011 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR 4