M/s Ambitious Finance & Investment Pvt. Ltd., RAJKOT-GUJARAT V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), RAJKOT-GUJARAT

MA 32/RJT/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8177 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-03-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 07-03-2024
• Assessment Year: 1997-1998
• Appeal Filed On: 15-08-2023
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH KUMAR PANDEY
• Section: 68; 254(2)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरणआयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट राजकोटराजकोट राजकोट यायपीठ, यायपीठ, यायपीठ, यायपीठ, राजकोट राजकोटराजकोट राजकोट IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (Conducted Through Virtual Court) ] ] BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Misc. Application NO.32/RJT/2023 IN ITA No.123/RJT/2014 Assessment Year : 1997-98 M/s. Ambitious Finance & Investment P. Ltd. 107, Kapad Market Para Bazar, Rajkot PAN : AABCA 8076 C Vs. ITO, Ward-2(4) Rajkot. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : Written Submission Revenue by : Shri Ashish Kumar Pandey, ld.Sr.DR सुनवाई क तारीख/D a t e o f He a r in g : 08/03/2024 घोषणा क तारीख /D a t e o f P r o no u nc e me nt: 21/03/2024 आदेश आदेशआदेश आदेश/O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER By way of the above Misc. Application, the assessee seeks recall of the order of the Tribunal passed in the above ITA No.32/RJT/2014 dated 6.3.2023 by pointing out certain defects in the impugned order. MA No.32/RJT/2023 2 2. Before adjudicating the Misc. Application (MA), it is imperative to note here the protracted legal proceedings in the present case. This marks the third round of litigation revolving around the same substantive issue. In the initial round, the appellant's appeal in ITA No.123/RJT/2024 was adjudicated by the Tribunal vide order dated 12.3.2021, wherein the Tribunal, in the absence of representation from the assessee, dismissed the appeal on its merits, basing its decision on the written submissions tendered by the appellant. The Tribunal's decision was based on the appellant's failure to furnish requisite details of purported depositors, or to provide supporting evidences, either during the assessment proceedings or during subsequent appellate proceedings before the CIT(A),and even before the Tribunal in the initial appeal ,resulting in confirmation of addition made by AO u/s 68 of the Act of Rs.49.30 lacs 3. Subsequently, the assessee filed Misc. Application No.7/RJT/2021 under section 254(2) of the Act, seeking the recall of the aforementioned order dated 12.3.2021. This was premised on the contention that the entirety of the written submissions containing various issues, had been disregarded by the Tribunal, which manifested an error in the Tribunal's order necessitating its recall. The assesse pleaded that it had filed 3 pages of written submissions while the ITAT had considered only one page submission of the assessee.The Tribunal, upon due consideration of the assessee’s submissions, found merit in the plea, thereby recalling its earlier order dated 12.3.2021 and reinstating the appeal for fresh adjudication. 4. In the subsequent round of litigation, the narrative made by the assessee for recall of the order was that of the first round. Once again, MA No.32/RJT/2023 3 the assessee failed to appear, opting instead to submit written contentions in defense of its case. Despite the absence of representation, the Tribunal, mindful of the principles of justice, meticulously deliberated upon the matter. Detailed discussion ensued from page no.3 to 18 of the order dated 6.3.2023, wherein the Tribunal examined the written submissions filed by the assessee from pages 5 to 8, and scrutinized the issue pertaining to the cash credits received from the alleged depositors. Despite the assessee’s failure to fortify its stance before the Tribunal, one set of written submissions, purportedly from Shri D.R. Adhia, albeit without accompanying power of attorney, was considered. The Tribunal, affirming the Assessing Officer's findings, dismissed the appeal for the second time, concluding that the assessee had failed to discharge its burden of proof in dispelling the suspicious nature of the cash credits, thereby upholding the addition of Rs.49,30,000/-. 5. Undeterred by the above observation and outcome, the assessee endeavors once more to recall the second impugned order dated 6.3.2023 through the present Misc. Application, reiterating the same grounds as previously advanced. Admittedly nobody has come physically present before the Tribunal to argue the present appeal. Even in the Miscellaneous applications, nobody appears physically before the Tribunal. It is only some written submissions, that too noted by the ITAT in its order in second round to have not been filed by an authorized representative, that has been relied upon every time. The first round order was sought to be recalled on the premise that the ITAT had considered only 1 page written submission, while the assesse had filed 3 pages of written submission. In the second round the ITAT noted the entire 3 pages of MA No.32/RJT/2023 4 written submission filed by the assessee and found the sum and substance of averments therein to be similar to what was made in the one page submission considered while passing order in the first round. Its contention now is that 24 pages submitted with the written submissions were not considered by the ITAT while deciding the appeal. 6. The attitude of the assessee is, to say the least, extremely distressing. It does not care to appear before the ITAT to argue its own appeal, and seeks reliance on submissions noted to be filed by persons not authorized by it to do so. The ITAT in the interest of justice gives liberty to the assessee on all occasions. But nothing seems to stop the assessee from continuing with its unbecoming attitude. It now says that 24 pages filed along with the written submissions were not considered by the ITAT. The relevance of the same, as transpires from the application filed before us, is that it contained assessment orders of persons from whom amounts received by the assessee and added in its hands as unexplained u/s 68 of the Act. And the said orders reveal that the impugned amounts were added in their hands. That therefore it was a case of double addition in the hands of the assessee which was not tenable in law. We have gone through our records and find that there is no paper book filed as required in terms of Rule 18 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules,1963. Some loose unnumbered papers are found in the file and they contain some orders which are not even certified. There arise no occasion therefore to take any cognizance of the same. 7. It is discernible from the MA filed by the assessee, therefore, that there is no reasonable justification made out in the MA for recall of the impugned order. We find the MA filed by the assessee is purely MA No.32/RJT/2023 5 with an intent to take the legal proceedings before the Tribunal for granted, and the assessee’s recurrent resort to such stratagems are aimed at recalling the impugned orders, ostensibly for favorable disposition. This attitude of the assessee of a calculated attempt to take undue advantage of the judicial process, resulting in significant wastage of time and resources of the Tribunal, is condemned in the strongest terms. Such repeated attempts and tactics by the assessee to seemingly overturn the impugned order through the repeated MA without there being any merit, is to be deprecated with a cost. Upon perusal of contents of the MA, we find no justifiable grounds, let alone merit, seeking for the recall of the Tribunal's order dated 6.3.2023. 8. In light of the foregoing, the Misc. Application No.32/RJT/2023 filed by the assessee is hereby dismissed with costs of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one Thousand), to be remitted to the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority, Ahmedabad forthwith. 9. In the result, the MA of the present is dismissed with cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees one Thousand). Order pronounced in the Court on 21 st March, 2024 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (MS. MADHUMITA ROY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad, dated 21/03/2024 vk*