9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay Pal Rao, JM And Shri Bhagchand, AM Assessee by : Shri Rajendra Jain (CA) Revenue by : Smt. Neena Jeph (JCIT) ORDER Per : Bhagchand, A.M. The assessee has filed the present Misc. application on 02/06/2017 against the order of the ITAT, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur dated 24/08/2016 passed in ITA No. 720/JP/2014 for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. In this case, the assessee filed appeal vide ITA No. 720/JP/2014 for the assessment year 2010-11 against the order of learned CIT(A)- III, Jaipur dated 24/09/2014. This Coordinate Bench of the ITAT, Jaipur has decided the appeal in absence of the assessee by applying decision of Delhi Bench of ITAT in the case of CIT Vs Multiplan India (P) Ltd. (1991) 38 ITD 320 and dismissed the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cordance with law. b) Further Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Tribhuwan Kumar v CIT reported in 294 ITR 401 impliedly overruled the Delhi Bench decision in the case of Multiplan India (P) Ltd reported in 38ITD 320 Therefore the appellant prays that ex parte order passed may kindly be recalled and the appeal be decided on merits after hearing the appellant. 4. After hearing both the sides, the Bench is of the view that the order was passed on 24/8/2016 and the Misc. application has been filed on 02/6/2017. As per the amendment in Section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 w.e.f. 01/6/2016, the limitation for filing the M.A. is only six months. Thus, this M.A. is beyond the time limit provided in the Act. The Coordinate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he above order of the Hon ble jurisdiction High Court, it is noted that the Hon ble High Court has observed that the appeal is not the proper remedy and the same is not maintainable and appropriate remedy for the appellant is to approach the Tribunal for appropriate relief. Thus, the Hon ble High Court has neither the directed the Revenue to file the miscellaneous application nor has expressed any view on the limitation for filing the miscellaneous application. The Hon ble High Court as just observed that the grievance of the Revenue could have been raised in the miscellaneous application instead of filing the appeal. Rather on the date of passing the order dated 23.11.2016 the miscellaneous application could have been filed and the limitat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ifying any mistake apparent from the record73, amend any order passed by it under sub-section (1), and 73shall make such amendment73 if the mistake is brought to its notice by the assessee or the 74[Assessing] Officer : Provided that an amendment which has the effect of enhancing an assessment or reducing a refund or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee, shall not be made under this sub-section unless the Appellate Tribunal has given notice to the assessee of its intention to do so and has allowed the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard : 75[Provided further that any application filed by the assessee in this sub-section on or after the 1st day of October, 1998, shall be accompanied by a fee of fifty ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowed under the first proviso or the period or periods extended or allowed under the second proviso, which shall not, in any case, exceed three hundred and sixty-five days, the order of stay shall stand vacated after the expiry of such period or periods, even if the delay in disposing of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee.]] (2B) The cost of any appeal to the Appellate Tribunal shall be at the discretion of that Tribunal. Hence, the miscellaneous application filed after the expiry of limitation is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. Considering the factual and legal position on this issue, the M.A. filed by the assessee is dismissed. 5. In the result, the present Misc. application is dismissed. Order p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
