SAMEER AGARWAL, Jaipur V. DCIT, Jaipur

MA 9/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2337 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 19-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 09-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S L PODDAR
• Section: 131

Judgement Text

MA 09/JP/2014 SHRI SAMEER AGARWAL VS. DCIT 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH: JAIPUR (BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI AND SHRI T.R. MEENA) M.A. NO. 09/JP/2014 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 728/JP/2013) ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 SHRI SAMEER AGARWAL VS. THE D.C.I.T. 129-E, GOVIND NAGAR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, DUSHERRA KOTHI, JAIPUR JAIPUR. PAN: AFWPA 9565 K (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI S.L. PODDAR DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAJESH OJHA. DATE OF HEARING : 12/09/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19/09/2014. O R D E R PER T.R. MEENA, A.M. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS M.A. AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE SMC BENCH OF THE ITAT, JAIPUR IN ITA NO. 728/JP/2013 FO R A.Y. 2009-10, WHICH WAS PASSED ON 11/10/2013. 2. IN THIS CASE, IT HAS BEEN CLAIMED THAT THE ASSES SEES APPEAL WAS DECIDED EX PARTE BY THE HONBLE BENCH. THE ASSESSEE S COUNSEL HAD NOT ATTENDED THE HEARING ON THE DATE FIXED DUE TO CALL OF BAR ASSOCIATION AND THE CASE WAS DECIDED EX PARTE WITHOUT PROVIDING OPPOR TUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IT IS PRAYED TO RESTORE TH E APPEAL. MA 09/JP/2014 SHRI SAMEER AGARWAL VS. DCIT 2 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED D.R. VEHEMENTLY OPPOS ED THE M.A. AND POINTED THAT THERE IS NO APPARENT MISTAKE IN THE HO NBLE BENCHS ORDER DATED 11/10/2013. THE ASSESSEE EVEN NOT ATTENDED THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS EVEN AFTER NOTICE U/S 131 OF THE I.T. AC T WAS ISSUED AND SERVED FOR PERSONAL HEARING ON 10/10/2013 FOR VERIF ICATION OF HIS SIGNATURE. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED SUFFICIENT TIME BY THE HONBL E BENCH. THUS, THE PRESENT M.A. MAY BE DISMISSED. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD AND ALSO GONE THRO UGH THE ORDER OF THIS BENCH. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT POI NTED OUT ANY SPECIFIC MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE ITAT DATED 11/10/2013. H E IS ONLY EXPLAINED THE REASON FOR NOT ATTENDING THE PROCEEDING BUT HE SHOULD HAVE DIRECTED TO ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE HONBLE BENCH AS NOTI CE U/S 131 OF THE I.T. ACT WAS ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE APPELLANT. IN VIEW O F THE ABOVE FACTS, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THIS M.A., THEREFORE, WE DISMIS S THE SAME. 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES MISCELLANEOUS APPLICAT ION STANDS DISMISSED. AS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19/09/2014. SD/- SD/- (R.P. TOLANI) (T.R. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JAIPUR, DATED: 19 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014 * RANJAN MA 09/JP/2014 SHRI SAMEER AGARWAL VS. DCIT 3 COPY FORWARDED TO :- 1. SHRI SAMEER AGARWAL, JAIPUR. 2. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE-3, JAIPUR 3. THE CIT (A) 4. THE CIT 5. THE D/R GUARD FILE (M.A. NO. 09/JP/2014) BY ORDER, AR ITAT JAIPUR.