Vinod Kumar Goyal, Jaipur vs Assessee

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. 21/JP/2014 (Arising out of M.A. No. 50/JP/2010 in ITA No. 146/JP/2006 & C.O. No. 35/JP/2006) Asstt. Year-2002-03

Vinod Kumar Goyal cuke A.C.I.T., Circle-5, B-68, Saket Colony, Jaipur. Vs. Jaipur.

LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. AAPPG 1934 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent

fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None (Adj. application rejected) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Kailash Mangal (JCIT)

lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 15/05/2015 ?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 15/05/2015

vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: T.R. MEENA, A.M.

The assessee has filed this Miscellaneous Application U/s 254(2) of the

Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) against the order of this Bench of

ITAT, Jaipur in MA No. 50/JP/2010, which was passed on 25/07/2014. 2 M.A. No. 21/JP/2014_

Vinod Kumar Goyal Vs. ACIT

2. In this case, this Bench had passed a detailed order in ITA No.

146/JP/2006 and C.O. No. 35/JP/2006 for A.Y. 2002-03 on 26th October, 2007.

The assessee filed M.A. on 01/7/2010 against the Coordinate Bench decision

dated 26/10/2007 and it reversed the order of the ld CIT(A).

3. The assessee's M.A. dated 01/7/2010 was fixed by this office for hearing

and number of dates were given to him for appearance, but he failed to

appear before the Bench. Therefore, this Bench has dismissed the assessee's

M.A. vide order dated 25/07/2014 on account of non-appearance of the

party/AR.

4. The assessee again filed M.A. against the dismissal order of M.A. dated

25/07/2014, which was received on 09/09/2014 and submitted as under:-

(i) That the applicant resides at B-68, Saket Colony, jaipur.

(ii) That the applicant has filed M.A. registered at No. 50/JP/2010 arising out of ITA No. 146/JP/2006 and C.P. 35/JP/2006 for the A.Y. 2003-04, which was decided on 26/10/2007.

(iii) That M.A. registered at 50/JP/2010 has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Tribunal on 25/07/2014 on account of non-appearance of applicant.

(iv) It is stated in the order that notice of hearing was returned unserved.

(v) That the applicant residing on the address given above alongwith his four brothers and their family.

3 M.A. No. 21/JP/2014_ Vinod Kumar Goyal Vs. ACIT

(vi) That the notice was not received by applicant nor by his family members and he also certified that no occasion his residence remains closed because his brothers family also reside there.

(vii) That the detailed written submission and counter reply were filed and his counsel also appeared on several occasion to argue the matter.

(viii) That the order dated 25/07/2014 issued in Misc. application No. 50/JP/2010 was received on 16/08/2014.

(ix) Affidavit in support of application and fee are enclosed.

(x) That the applicant humbly prays for restoration of Misc.

application and to decide on merits to meet the end of justice."

5. This M.A. also fixed by this office repeatedly but the assessee had not

appeared and simply sent the letter for adjournment of more than five times.

Again today, we received an adjournment application through speed post,

wherein it has been claimed that his counsel is having problem due to Nepal

Earthquake.

6. The ld D.R. has opposed again and again adjournment in this case and

argued that there is no genuine reason in the M.A., which can be decided by

this Bench and the assessee has taken lightly the proceedings of the Hon'ble

ITAT, therefore, this M.A. may be dismissed.

4 M.A. No. 21/JP/2014_

Vinod Kumar Goyal Vs. ACIT

7. We have heard the rival submissions of the ld DR and perused the

material available on the record. It appears that the assessee is habitual to file

adjournment application on different reasons on number of occasions. It

appears that there is no strength in the case of the assessee. The assessee is

delaying the legal proceeding by filing repeated adjournment application

without any substantial reason. Thus, second M.A. filed by the assessee

against the M.A., which cannot be rectified U/s 254(2) of the Act as there is no

apparent mistake in the order of this Bench. Therefore, we dismiss the

assessee's M.A..

8. In the result, the Misc. Application of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 15/05/2015.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼vkj-ih-rksykuh½ ¼Vh-vkj-ehuk½ (R.P.Tolani) (T.R. Meena) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member

Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 15th May, 2015 *Ranjan

vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf'kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Vinod Kumar Goyal, Ajmer.

2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The A.C.I.T., Circle-5, Jaipur.

3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 5 M.A. No. 21/JP/2014_ Vinod Kumar Goyal Vs. ACIT

4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A)

5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur

6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (M.A. 21/JP/2014)

vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar