Sawarmal, Hyderabad V. ITO, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

MA 43/Hyd/2023

AI Insights

The case revolves around a Miscellaneous Application filed by Mr. Sawarmal, the assessee, against the Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad. The application was initially filed to recall an order passed in ITA No. 545/Hyd/2022, which was claimed to have been issued without proper notice to the assessee. The Tribunal had previously noted that the notices were allegedly refused by the assessee, as recorded by the postal servant. However, the Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice and the need to ensure that the correct tax liability is determined without prejudice, allowed the application after the assessee complied with the conditions set, including the payment of costs.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 133415 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 15-06-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 13-06-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 16-04-2023
• Laws Referred To: Evidence Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “SMC”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER वि.आिे.सं / M.A. No. 43/Hyd/2023 (Arising out of ITA No. 545/Hyd/2022) (निर्धारण िर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Mr. Sawarmal, Hyderabad [PAN No. AGQPS1710H] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2) , Hyderabad. अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत् यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्िधरध / Assessee by: Shri A.V. Raghuram, AR रधजस् ि द्िधरध / Revenue by: Ms. R. Helen Ruby Jesindha, Addl.CIT-DR स ु ििधई की तधरीख/Date of hearing: 14/06/2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement on: 16/06/2023 आदेश / ORDER This Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the assessee in ITA No. 545/Hyd/2022 and on 02/06/2023, after hearing both the counsel, the following order was passed: “Heard both the sides and perused the material paper on record. This Miscellaneous Application is filed with a prayer to recall the order dated 26/12/2022 passed in ITA No. 545/Hyd/2022 on the ground that the notices of hearing sent to the assessee by the Tribunal were never received by him. However, on a perusal of the record, it is found that on both the occasions, there is an endorsement by the postal servant on the mail containing the notice to the effect that the assessee refused to receive the mail. 2. Learned AR submits that it is only on receiving the order in ITA, the assessee came to know of the issuances of notice or disposal of the matter exparte. This submission of the learned AR is not convincing me, because, if at all we have to accept that the postal servant has any axe to grind against the assessee, there would not be any reason for the same person to record a false statement twice in respect of the mail containing the notice, but to serve the order of the appeal on the third occasion. Though the presumption of law is MA No. 43/Hyd/2023 Page 2 of 3 in favour of the acts done by the public servant under section 114 (e) and 114 (f) of the Evidence Act, according to which judicial and official acts are presumed to have been performed regularly and that the common course of business has been followed in particular cases. On this premise, I do not find the contention advanced raised on behalf of the assessee as totally justified. 3. Be that as it may, all the endeavour of the authorities under the Income tax Act is to see that the correct tax liability of the assessee is determined, and for that purpose, it is always desirable to take a view which will not cause any prejudice to the parties. Such a course requires a balance between giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee and also to secure the participation of the assessee in deciding the matters on merits. The lapse on the part of the assessee could be corrected by placing the assessee on two conditions. One is to levy costs and the other is to secure his co- operation for the disposal of the matter on merits. With this view of the matter, I direct the assessee to pay costs of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) to the credit of the Prime Minister’s relief fund and also that he be ready to proceed with the matter on merits on 14/06/2023, failing compliance in either of the conditions, this Miscellaneous Application shall stand dismissed. For compliance call on 14/06/2023.” 2. Miscellaneous Application is called on 14/06/2023. Heard learned AR for the assessee, Mr. Raghuram and learned Addl.CIT-DR, Ms. R. Helen Ruby Jesindha. 3. Assessee produced the proof of payment of Rs. 1,000/- to the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund towards costs, and learned DR reports ready to argue. Hence, I find that both the conditions prescribed in the order dated 02/06/2023 are complied with. Hence, the Miscellaneous Application is allowed. Registry is directed to fix the appeal for hearing on 27/06/2023 and also directed to issue notices to both the parties, mentioning the next date of hearing. Order pronounced in the open court on this the 16 th day of June, 2023. Sd/- (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 16/06/2023 TNMM MA No. 43/Hyd/2023 Page 3 of 3 Copy forwarded to: 1. Mr. Sawarmal, 21-1-748, Rikabgunj, Hyderabad. 2. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad. 3. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 4. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, HYDERABAD