2015 (10) TMI 1876 - AT - Income Tax

Miscellaneous Applications dismissed for ex-parte for want of prosecuting these objections - Held that - It is for assessees to make arrangements for receipt of the notices. In the absence of any compliance to the notices, Miscellaneous Applications again were dismissed ex-parte. Even as seen from the present Miscellaneous Applications, assessees addresses have changed from Plot No. 80, Road No. 9, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad to Fortune Monarch Hall, 3rd Floor, # 306, Plot No. 707 709, Jubilee Hills, Road No. 36, Hyderabad. Even for the new address now given, no communication has been filed separately. In the absence of any clear indication at what place assessees are functioning at present, It may be difficult for the registry to serve notices on the parties. Unless assessees make arrangements on its own or follow up with the registry, this forum cannot be held responsible for non-service of notices/orders. Considering the sequence of events and the fact that assessees are undergoing lot of disturbances in the business being part of Satyam Group of cases which have been investigated by various authorities and considering the submissions of assessees and facts of the case, we are of the opinion that Miscellaneous Applications filed on 27-07-2011 can be restored by recalling the order dt. 23-09-2011. However, assessee is directed to pay a cost of ₹ 1,000/- per Miscellaneous Application, as there is failure on its part in furnishing the correct addresses. Assessees herein are directed to pay cost of ₹ 1,000/- per each Miscellaneous Application, as per the rules.

Summary

Issues:
1. Recalling of order dismissing Miscellaneous Applications for non-prosecution due to lack of compliance.
2. Correct address communication and service of notices to the parties.
3. Restoration of Miscellaneous Applications and payment of costs.

Analysis:
1. The judgment involves the consideration of 18 Miscellaneous Applications filed for recalling the order passed on 23-09-2011, where the appeals were dismissed ex-parte for non-prosecution. The assessees requested to recall the order as they were unaware of the date of posting and had faced disturbances in their business, leading to non-compliance with the notices. The assessees prayed for a fair adjudication of the matter on merits after hearing both parties.

2. The issue of correct address communication and service of notices was raised as the assessees had changed their address but failed to update it in the Miscellaneous Applications filed on 27-07-2011. The assessees' addresses had changed, causing difficulties in serving notices. The tribunal emphasized the importance of assessees providing the correct address to ensure proper service of notices and orders, holding them responsible for non-compliance.

3. The judgment allowed the restoration of the 18 Miscellaneous Applications by recalling the order dated 23-09-2011. However, the assessees were directed to pay a cost of Rs. 1,000 per Miscellaneous Application for failing to furnish the correct addresses. The tribunal highlighted the need for assessees to inform the registry of the correct address to prevent future issues with non-service of notices. The restoration of the Miscellaneous Applications was granted, emphasizing compliance with address communication rules and the payment of costs.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issues of recalling orders, correct address communication, and restoration of Miscellaneous Applications, emphasizing compliance with address communication rules and the responsibility of assessees to ensure proper service of notices.