ANJALI SAPRA L/H LATE JITENDER SAPRA,NEW DELHI V. ITO,WARD 50(4), NEW DELHI

ITA 1826/DEL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves three appeals by the assessee, Anjali Sapra, against the additions confirmed by the CIT(A) for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, and 2010-11, and one appeal against the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2008-09. The appeals were initially dismissed by the CIT(A) in an ex-parte order, which the assessee contested on the grounds of not receiving proper notice. The department defended the initial orders but agreed to a restoration of the appeals for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 298883 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAVED AKHTAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S V K SABHARWAL; ADITYA ROY
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िदʟी पीठ “ए”, िदʟी ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी एस įरफौर रहमान, लेखाकार सद˟ क े समƗ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.1826 to 1829/िदʟी/2023(िन.व. 2008-09 to 2010-11) ITA No. 1826 to 1829/DEL/2023 (A.Y. 2008-09 to 2010-11) Anjali Sapra, L/H Late Jitender Sapra, C/o Sabharwal & Partners, 4819/24, Mathur Lane, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi 110002 PAN: AUJPS-2662-R ...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-50(4), New Delhi, ..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent Assessee by : S/Shri V K Sabharwal & Aditya Roy, and Rajeev Kapur, Advocates Department by: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT-DR सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 23/04/2025 घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 23/04/2025 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: The three appeals by the assesse for AY 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11, respectively are against additions confirmed by the CIT(A) for each assessment year in an ex-parte proceedings and one appeal i.e. ITA No. 1827/Del/2023 for AY 2008-09 is against confirming penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by the CIT(A) in an ex-parte order. 2. Shri V K Sabharwal, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits at the outset that the CIT(A) has dismissed appeals of the assessee in an ex-parte order 2 ITA Nos. 1826 to 1829/Del/2023 (AY 2008-09 to 2010-11) without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The notices issued by the CIT(A) were never served on the assessee on the address provided in column no. 12 of Form No. 35. Since, the notices were never served on the assessee, the assessee could not makes submissions before the CIT(A). The ld. Counsel further submitted that the assessee has prima facie good case on merits. If an opportunity is granted to the assessee to make submissions before the CIT(A), the assessee would be able to make out a case in her favour on merits. The ld. Counsel further pointed that in so far as the penalty appeal for AY 2008-09 is concerned, the assessee has a strong case as the notice issued u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for levy of penalty is defective. 3. Per contra, Shri Javed Akhtar representing the department vehemently defended the impugned orders. The ld. DR submitted that multiple notices were issued to the assesee, however, the assessee failed to comply with any of the notices. The ld. DR fairly stated that appeals can be restored back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits with a direction to the assessee to respond to the notice issued by the CIT(A). 4. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides. These appeals by the assessee are against ex-parte order passed by CIT(A) for AY 2008-09 to 2010-11, as well as in penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for AY 2008-09. During hearing of appeals, the ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed that vide letter dated 18.04.2025, the assessee had requested the AO to supply certified copies of documents for the respective three assessment years. However, these copies have not been provided to the assessee till date. The Counsel for the assessee reiterated the request made by the assessee, as per the letter dated 18.04.2025 (supra). The ld. DR graciously offered to provide the copies of the documents as 3 ITA Nos. 1826 to 1829/Del/2023 (AY 2008-09 to 2010-11) requested by the Counsel for the assessee as he was having assessment folder for all the three assessment years with him. The ld. DR provided copies of all the relevant documents to Counsel for the assessee in the court today. 5. Without commenting on merits of appeals, these appeals are restored back to CIT(A) for denovo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law. The reason for non appearance of the assessee before the CIT(A) is stated to be non service of notice to the assessee. The ld. Counsel submits that the notice may be issued by the CIT(A) to the assessee on the following Email ID:- “[e-mail]” 6. The CIT(A) shall issue notice(s) to the assessee on the Email ID provided by the Counsel for the assessee in the court today. 7. The assessee upon service of the notice shall respond to the same, without fail. 8. In the result, all four appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on Wednesday the 23rd day of April, 2025 in presence of rival sides. Sd/- Sd/- (S RIFAUR RAHMAN) (VIKAS AWASTHY) लेखाकार सद᭭य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िदʟी/Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 23/04/2025 NV/- 4 ITA Nos. 1826 to 1829/Del/2023 (AY 2008-09 to 2010-11) ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant , 2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT/CIT(A) 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी 5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, DELHI "