VINOD KUMAR GOYAL, Jaipur V. ACIT, Jaipur

MA 21/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3021 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 10-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM M.A. NO. 21/JP/2014 (ARISING OUT OF M.A. NO. 50/JP/2010 IN ITA NO. 146/ JP/2006 & C.O. NO. 35/JP/2006) ASSTT. YEAR-2002-03 VINOD KUMAR GOYAL B-68, SAKET COLONY, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ L A-@ PAN/GIR NO. AAPPG 1934 L VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : NONE (ADJ. APPLICATION REJECTED) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI KAILASH MANGAL (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 15/05/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15/05/2015 VKNS'K @ ORDER PER: T.R. MEENA, A.M. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATI ON U/S 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) AGAINST THE ORDER OF THIS BENCH OF ITAT, JAIPUR IN MA NO. 50/JP/2010, WHICH WAS PASSED O N 25/07/2014. M.A. NO. 21/JP/2014_ VINOD KUMAR GOYAL VS. ACIT 2 2. IN THIS CASE, THIS BENCH HAD PASSED A DETAILED O RDER IN ITA NO. 146/JP/2006 AND C.O. NO. 35/JP/2006 FOR A.Y. 2002-0 3 ON 26 TH OCTOBER, 2007. THE ASSESSEE FILED M.A. ON 01/7/2010 AGAINST THE COO RDINATE BENCH DECISION DATED 26/10/2007 AND IT REVERSED THE ORDER OF THE L D CIT(A). 3. THE ASSESSEES M.A. DATED 01/7/2010 WAS FIXED BY T HIS OFFICE FOR HEARING AND NUMBER OF DATES WERE GIVEN TO HIM FOR APPEARANCE , BUT HE FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE BENCH. THEREFORE, THIS BENCH HAS D ISMISSED THE ASSESSEES M.A. VIDE ORDER DATED 25/07/2014 ON ACCOUNT OF NON- APPEARANCE OF THE PARTY/AR. 4. THE ASSESSEE AGAIN FILED M.A. AGAINST THE DISMISS AL ORDER OF M.A. DATED 25/07/2014, WHICH WAS RECEIVED ON 09/09/2014 AND SUB MITTED AS UNDER:- (I) THAT THE APPLICANT RESIDES AT B-68, SAKET COLONY , JAIPUR. (II) THAT THE APPLICANT HAS FILED M.A. REGISTERED AT NO. 50/JP/2010 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 146/JP/2006 AND C.P. 35/JP/2 006 FOR THE A.Y. 2003-04, WHICH WAS DECIDED ON 26/10/2007. (III) THAT M.A. REGISTERED AT 50/JP/2010 HAS BEEN DI SMISSED BY THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL ON 25/07/2014 ON ACCOUNT OF NON-APP EARANCE OF APPLICANT. (IV) IT IS STATED IN THE ORDER THAT NOTICE OF HEARI NG WAS RETURNED UNSERVED. (V) THAT THE APPLICANT RESIDING ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN ABOVE ALONGWITH HIS FOUR BROTHERS AND THEIR FAMILY. M.A. NO. 21/JP/2014_ VINOD KUMAR GOYAL VS. ACIT 3 (VI) THAT THE NOTICE WAS NOT RECEIVED BY APPLICANT NO R BY HIS FAMILY MEMBERS AND HE ALSO CERTIFIED THAT NO OCCASION HIS RESIDENCE REMAINS CLOSED BECAUSE HIS BROTHERS FAMILY ALSO RES IDE THERE. (VII) THAT THE DETAILED WRITTEN SUBMISSION AND COUNTE R REPLY WERE FILED AND HIS COUNSEL ALSO APPEARED ON SEVERAL OCCASION T O ARGUE THE MATTER. (VIII) THAT THE ORDER DATED 25/07/2014 ISSUED IN MIS C. APPLICATION NO. 50/JP/2010 WAS RECEIVED ON 16/08/2014. (IX) AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION AND FEE AR E ENCLOSED. (X) THAT THE APPLICANT HUMBLY PRAYS FOR RESTORATION OF MISC. APPLICATION AND TO DECIDE ON MERITS TO MEET THE END OF JUSTICE. 5. THIS M.A. ALSO FIXED BY THIS OFFICE REPEATEDLY BU T THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT APPEARED AND SIMPLY SENT THE LETTER FOR ADJOURNMENT OF MORE THAN FIVE TIMES. AGAIN TODAY, WE RECEIVED AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION THROUGH SPEED POST, WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN CLAIMED THAT HIS COUNSEL IS HAVI NG PROBLEM DUE TO NEPAL EARTHQUAKE. 6. THE LD D.R. HAS OPPOSED AGAIN AND AGAIN ADJOURNME NT IN THIS CASE AND ARGUED THAT THERE IS NO GENUINE REASON IN THE M.A., WHICH CAN BE DECIDED BY THIS BENCH AND THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN LIGHTLY THE P ROCEEDINGS OF THE HONBLE ITAT, THEREFORE, THIS M.A. MAY BE DISMISSED. M.A. NO. 21/JP/2014_ VINOD KUMAR GOYAL VS. ACIT 4 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IT APPEARS THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS HABITUAL TO FILE ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION ON DIFFERENT REASONS ON NUM BER OF OCCASIONS. IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS NO STRENGTH IN THE CASE OF TH E ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DELAYING THE LEGAL PROCEEDING BY FILING REPEATED AD JOURNMENT APPLICATION WITHOUT ANY SUBSTANTIAL REASON. THUS, SECOND M.A. FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE M.A., WHICH CANNOT BE RECTIFIED U/S 254( 2) OF THE ACT AS THERE IS NO APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THIS BENCH. THEREFO RE, WE DISMISS THE ASSESSEES M.A.. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE ASSE SSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15/05/2015. SD/- SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH VH-VKJ-EHUK (R.P.TOLANI) (T.R. MEENA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ @ JAIPUR FNUKAD @ DATED:- 15 TH MAY, 2015 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- VINOD KUMAR GOYAL, AJMER. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT M.A. NO. 21/JP/2014_ VINOD KUMAR GOYAL VS. ACIT 5 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (M.A. 21/JP/2014) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR