SHRI RAJESH NAVLAKHA, Jaipur V. ITO, WARD-2-1, Jaipur

MA 82/JPR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6249 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 27-06-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J C KULHARI

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM M.A. NO. 82/JP/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 844/JP/2013) FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2005-06 SHRI RAJESH NAWLAKHA 3739, NAWLAKHA HOUSE, KGB KA RASTA, JOHARI BAZAAR, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE ITO, WARD -2(1), JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ABKPN 3098A VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P. C. PARWAL (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI J. C. KULHARI (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 02/11/2018 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 24/01/2019 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THIS IS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE UNDER RULE 24 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RULES, 1963 IN RESPECT OF ORDER DATED 10.03.2016 PASSED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH EX- PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE WHEREIN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE A SSESSEE WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. M.A. NO. 82/JP/2018 SHRI RAJESH NAWLAKHA, JAIPUR VS. ITO, WARD-2(1), JAIPUR 2 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORD ER GIVING RISE TO THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION PASSE D BY THE TRIBUNAL ON 10.03.2016 WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHIFTED IN JULY 2014 TO HIS N EW ADDRESS AT 5 PUSHPA PATH, UNIRA GARDEN, JLN MARG, JAIPUR AS AGAI NST THE ADDRESS GIVEN IN FORM 36 WHICH IS 3739 KGB KA RASTA, JOHARI BAZAR, JAIPUR. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE CAME TO KNOW ABO UT THE PASSING BY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL FROM INCOME TAX DEPART MENT AND THEREAFTER, MOVED AN APPLICATION DATED 29.07.2017 B EFORE THE REGISTRY FOR OBTAINING A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDE R AND A COPY OF THE SAID ORDER WAS PROVIDED BY THE REGISTRY TO THE ASSE SSEE ON 13.06.2018. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED BY THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH EX-PARTE BECAUSE OF NON APPEARANCE W HICH IS DUE TO CHANGE OF ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND NON RECEIPT O F THE NOTICE. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT KEEPING THE CAUSE OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE IN MIND, THE APPEAL DECIDED EX-PARTE QUA TH E ASSESSEE MAY BE RESTORED FOR HEARING ON MERITS. 4. THE LD. DR IS HEARD WHO HAS OPPOSED THE MISCELLA NEOUS APPLICATION AND SUBMITTED THAT THERE HAS BEEN SUBST ANTIAL DELAY IN MOVING THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION AND THE SAME S HOULD NOT BE ENTERTAINED. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS NOTED THAT IN FORM 36 FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 11 TH NOVEMBER, 2013, THE ADDRESS TO WHICH NOTICE MAY BE SEND M.A. NO. 82/JP/2018 SHRI RAJESH NAWLAKHA, JAIPUR VS. ITO, WARD-2(1), JAIPUR 3 TO THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN STATED AS 3739, NAWLAKHA HOUSE, KGB KA RASTA, JOHARI BAZAR, JAIPUR AND THEREAFTER THE MAT TER WAS FIRST LISTED FOR HEARING ON 1 ST JUNE, 2015. THEREAFTER THE MATTER WAS AGAIN LISTED FOR HEARING ON 22.02.2016 AND THEN FINALLY ON 10.03 .2016 AND GIVEN THE CONSISTENT NON-APPEARANCE BY THE LD AR/ASSESSEE , THE MATTER WAS DECIDED EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 10.03.2016. THEREAFTER, THE AS SESSEE HAS MOVED AN APPLICATION WITH THE REGISTRY ON 30.06.2017 STAT ING AS UNDER:- WE DREW YOUR HONOURS ATTENTION TO THE CAPTIONED A PPEAL IN THE CASE OF CAPTIONED ASSESSEE FOR AY 2005-06. THE ASSE SSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY NOTICE OR CORRESPONDENCES IN RESPECT O F ABOVE APPEAL SINCE FILING OF APPEAL IN 2013. HOWEVER, OF LATE, THE ASSESSEE LEARNT IN THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THAT THE MATTER HAS BEEN DISPOSED OFF BY THE HONBL E INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. THE ASSESSEE FOUND IT HARD TO B ELIEVE AS NO NOTICE OF HEARING OR CORRESPONDENCE WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD TILL DATE. WE, THUS, VIDE THIS LETTER R EQUEST YOUR HONOUR TO KINDLY PROVIDE US THE EXACT STATUS OF THE AFORESAID APPEAL AND THE COPY OF ORDER IN CASE THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DISPOSED OFF BY THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. 6. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE HAS WRITTEN ANOTHER LET TER DATED 22 ND SEPTEMBER, 2017 DRAWING REFERENCE TO HIS EARLIER LE TTER AND REITERATED THAT HE WAS NOT WORKING AT THE ADDRESS M ENTIONED IN FORM 36 FOR LAST THREE YEARS AS HE HAD SHIFTED TO A NEW ADDRESS AND HE HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY NOTICE, CORRESPONDENCE OR O RDER SO PASSED M.A. NO. 82/JP/2018 SHRI RAJESH NAWLAKHA, JAIPUR VS. ITO, WARD-2(1), JAIPUR 4 BY THE TRIBUNAL AND IN SUPPORT, AN AFFIDAVIT WAS AL SO FILED. THEREAFTER, A COPY OF THE ORDER WAS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE REGISTRY ON 13.06.2018. 7. IN LIGHT OF ABOVE FACTUAL MATRIX, WHAT EMERGES IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHIFTED TO A NEW ADDRESS IN JULY 2014 AFTER FILING THE APPEAL. THE NOTICES HAVE BEEN SENT BY THE REGISTRY AT THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS WHICH HAS BEEN COMMUNICATED BY HIM EA RLIER WHILE FILING THE APPEAL AND GIVEN THAT THE SAID NOTICES H AVE NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THERE HAS BEEN NO APPEARANCE EITHER B Y THE ASSESSEE OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L. THE TRIBUNAL HAS THEREAFTER PASSED THE ORDER EX-PARTY QUA THE AS SESSEE AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINE FOR NON-PROSECUTION AND A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSE SSEE ON 13.06.2018. AT THE SAME TIME, WE FIND THAT WHERE T HE ASSESSEE HAS MOVED TO HIS NEW ADDRESS IN JULY 2014 AND AT THAT T IME, HIS APPEAL WAS PENDING DISPOSAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, IT WAS IN CUMBENT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO INFORM THE REGISTRY ABOUT H IS NEW ADDRESS WHEREIN THE NOTICE COULD HAVE BEEN DISPATCHED AND P RECIOUS TIME OF THE REGISTRY AND THE TRIBUNAL COULD HAVE BEEN SAVED . 8. HAVING SAID THAT, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT THE APPEAL HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED ON MERITS AND HAS BEEN DISMISSED I N LIMINE FOR NON-PROSECUTION AND NOT ON MERITS, THEREFORE, KEEPI NG THE PRINCIPLE OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE IN MIND, WE HEREBY RECALL TH E ORDER PASSED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN ITA NO. 844/JP/2013 SUBJEC T TO COST OF RS 5000/- FOR THE DELAY AND LATCHES ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN TERMS M.A. NO. 82/JP/2018 SHRI RAJESH NAWLAKHA, JAIPUR VS. ITO, WARD-2(1), JAIPUR 5 OF NOT INFORMING THE REGISTRY OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS AT WHICH NOTICES COULD HAVE BEEN DISPATCHED. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISPOSED OFF IN LIGHT OF ABOVE DIRECTIO NS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/01/2019. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 24/01/2019. * GANESH KR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI RAJESH NAWLAKHA, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD-2(1), JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {M.A NO. 82/JP/2018} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR