Rajesh Kumar Nigam, Jaipur vs Assessee
- CitationITA No. 445/JP/2011)
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal may recall its own ex-parte order where the assessee establishes sufficient cause for non-appearance on the date of hearing; on such showing, the ex-parte order is set aside and the appeal restored for fresh hearing.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
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. 27/JP/2014 (Arising out of vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 445/JP/2011) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 1999-2000
Shri Rajesh Kumar Nigam cuke The ITO G-2, Krishan Apartment-II, Vs. Ward- 4 (1) Sector-7,Vidhyadhar Jaipur Nagar, Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABQPN 2955 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent
fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri K.R. Sabbarwal jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by :Smt. Neena Jeph, JCIT
lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 27/02/2015 ?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 13 /03/2015
vkns'k@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM
Through this Miscellaneous Application, the assessee prays for
recalling of ex-parte order dated 10-09-2014 of Tribunal in ITA No.
445//JP/2011 for the assessment year 1999-2000.
2. The assessee has filed an Affidavit mentioning therein the
following main reasons for not attending the case on the date of hearing. 2 M.A. No. 27/JP/2014
Shri Rajesh Kumar Nigam vs. ITO, Ward- 4 (1), Jaipur
(a) The address given in appeal was A-49-A,Shivam Complex, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur which was attached by the Bank/ C.B.I. and as such the same was closed from last 3 years.
(b) The applicant was residing with the relatives and was in search of permanent house and therefore, could not intimate the new address.
© The applicant has not received any notice of hearing from anybody.
(d) On 12th Oct. 2004, the applicant was passing from the old address and there one Shri Munshi Mohd. (shopkeeper) delivered the order and the applicant came to know the above facts.
(e) The applicant's new address is G-2, Krishan Apartment - II, Sector-7, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Jaipur
3. On the other hand, the ld. DR opposed the miscellaneous
application.
4. After hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available
on record, we find that there was sufficient reasons on account of which
the assessee could not be present on the date of hearing. Hence, we set
aside the ex-parte order dated 10-09-2014 and direct the Registry to fix
the date of hearing of appeal on 23-04-2015. 3 M.A. No. 27/JP/2014
Shri Rajesh Kumar Nigam vs. ITO, Ward- 4 (1), Jaipur
5. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13/03/2015.
Sd/- Sd/- ¼Vh-vkj-ehuk½ ¼vkj-ih-rksykuh½ (T.R. Meena) (R.P.Tolani) ys[kk lnL;@ Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member
Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 13th March, 2015
*Mishra
vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzfs 'kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Rajesh Kumar Nigam
2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward- 4 (1), Jaipur
3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A).
4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The CIT
5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur
6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (MA No.27/JP/2014)
vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
lgk;d iathdkj@ Assistant. Registrar
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free