HARSHA GOYAL,GURGAON V. ITO,WARD-2(1), GURGAON

ITA 485/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Harsha Goyal, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which arose from an assessment order by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Gurgaon for the assessment year 2014-15. The primary contention was the addition of Rs.15,35,000 made by the Ld. AO in the assessment order dated 23.12.2016, which was upheld by the Ld. CIT(A) in their order dated 08.12.2023. The appellant argued that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to discuss the evidence submitted, leading to a violation of natural justice. The Tribunal agreed and decided to remand the case back to the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 314431 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Laws Referred To: Income-Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KUMAR DHANESTA
• Assessee Lawyers: AJIT GANDHI
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 131

Judgement Text

" INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 485/DEL/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Harsha Goyal, 436/16, Civil Lines, Gurgaon PIN 122 001 PAN No. BKQPG8452H Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The appeal filed by the appellant/assessee is against order dated 08.12.2023 of the Learned Commissioner of Income- Tax(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred as ‘Ld. CIT(A)’) arising out of assessment order dated 23.12.2016 under Section 143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “the Act”) of the ITO, Ward- 2(1), Gurgaon (hereinafter referred as “Ld. AO”) for assessment year 2014-15. Assessee by: Shri Ajit Gandhi, CA Department by: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 05.05.2025 Date of pronouncement: 05.05.2025 ITA No.485/Del/2024 2 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee filed return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on 30.03.2015 declaring income of Rs.16,27,090/-. The case was selected under scrutiny through CASS. Initial notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the appellant/assessee on 18.09.2015. Smt. Harsha Goyal, learned counsel, requested adjournment. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire was issued on 02.06.2016, fixing the case for 04.07.2016. In response to notice, Learned Authorised Representative of the assessee Shri Rajesh Kumar, CA attended and filed information in part. Thereafter, written submissions were filed by the appellant/assessee. Summons under Section 131 of the Act were issued to the assessee to appear and recording the statement for 13.12.2016. On the appointed date, assessee requested for adjournment. On the date fixed for hearing, neither the assessee nor his learned counsel attended the proceedings. On completion of proceedings, Ld. AO vide order dated 23.12.2016 made the addition of Rs.15,35,000/-. 3. Against order dated 23.12.2016 of the Ld. AO, appellant/assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which was dismissed vide order dated 08.12.2023. ITA No.485/Del/2024 3 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant/assessee filed present appeal. 5. Learned Authorised Representative for the appellant/assessee regarding ground no.1, submitted that Ld. CIT(A) failed to discuss the evidence submitted along with written submissions and documents and prayed for sending the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh decision. 6. Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue had no objection. 7. From examination of record in the light of light of aforesaid rival contentions, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 08.12.2023 upheld the order dated 23.12.2016 of Ld. Assessing Officer. Ld. CIT(A) failed to discuss the written submissions supported by documentary evidence as filed in the paper books in violation of principles of natural justice. In view of above material facts, in the interest of substantial justice, it is considered expedient to set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh decision in accordance with law. ITA No.485/Del/2024 4 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 05/05/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 07/05/2025 Mohan Lal Copy forwarded to - 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi "