Neena Hardeep Singh, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1016/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4080 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 24-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MONA MOHANTY
• Keywords: Depreciation; Additional evidence
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1016/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 NEENA HARDEEP SINGH, VS. ACIT, PROP. M/S NNS CLOTHING HOUSE, CENTRAL CIRCLE 18, L-5, HAUZ KHAS ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. ACFPS6984G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) & ITA NO. 1357/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 ITO, VS. NEENA HARDEEP SINGH, WARD 24(1), ROOM NO. 186, L-5, HAUZ KHAS ENCLAVE, C.R. BLDG., NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. ACFPS6984G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. AJAY VOHRA & ABHISHEK A GARWAL, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SMT. MONA MOHANTY, SR. DR ORDER PER I.P. BANSAL, J.M. BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE CROSS APPEALS AND THEY ARE DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) DATED 7.12.2010 FOR A.Y. 2005-06. GROUNDS OF APPEAL FOR BOTH THE APPEALS READ AS UNDE R: - GROUNDS OF ITA NO. 1016 : - 1. THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) E RRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN REJECTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FI LED BY THE APPELLANT UNDER RULE-46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1 962. ITA NOS. 1016 & 1357/D/2011 2 THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRE D ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE APPELLANT WAS P REVENTED BY SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO PRODUCE ABOVE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SHOULD HAVE IN DEPENDENTLY ENTERTAINED AND EXAMINED THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES PLACED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES, WHICH WERE CRUCIAL FOR DISPOS AL OF THE APPEAL. 2. THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ER RED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN SUSTAINING THE AD-HOC DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 77,532/- BEING 1/6 TH OF THE EXPENSES OF TELEPHONE, PETROL AND VEHICLE MAINTENANCE ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED PERSONAL USE BY T HE APPELLANT. 3. THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN SUSTAINING DISALLOWANCE OF TRAVELING EXPENSES OF RS. 6,03,358/ - ALLEGING THAT THE SAME WAS NOT ESTABLISHED TO BE INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES OF THE APPELLANT. 4. THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN SUSTAINING ADDITION OF RS. 10,76,596/-, BEING THE ALLEGED UNVE RIFIED CREDIT BALANCE IN THE ACCOUNT OF M/S ELEGANT FABRICS (P) L TD. HOLDING THAT NO CONFIRMATION FROM THE SAID PARTY WAS FURNIS HED BY THE APPELLANT. THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE ABOVE SUM REPRESENTS THE OPENING BALANCE O UTSTANDING IN THE ACCOUNT OF M/S ELEGANT FABRICS (P) LTD. AND NO ADDI TION WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF THE SAME IN THE EARLIER YEARS. 5. THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS. 28,466/- ON ACCOUNT OF CAR INSURANC E EXPENSES HOLDING THAT NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE WAS FURNISHED BY THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND OR VARY THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT OR BEFORE THE TIME OF HEARING. GROUNDS OF ITA NO. 1357 : - ITA NOS. 1016 & 1357/D/2011 3 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN DELETING THE A DDITION OF RS. 17,10,382/- MADE BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF OPENING STOCK AND PURCHASES TREATED AS BOGUS. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN DELETING THE A DDITION OF RS. 4,07,852/- MADE BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF DEPRECIATION. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEN D ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF HE ARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF EXPOR T OF GARMENTS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF M/S N.N.S. CLOTH HOUSE & M/S HABIT CLOTHING COMPANY. RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED AT RS . 2,42,008/-. ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN FRAMED U/S 144 OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 20.12.2010. IT IS OBSERVED BY THE AO IN THE ASSESS MENT ORDER THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT COOPERATE WITH THE DEPARTMENT IN F URNISHING DETAILS AND THE LIMITATION OF ASSESSMENT WAS GOING TO EXPIRE ON 21.12.2007. THEREFORE, THE AO HAS PROCEEDED TO ASSESS THE ASSES SEE U/S 144 OF THE ACT. VARIOUS ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE AO AN D INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ASSESSED AT RS. 41,46,020/- AGAIN ST THE RETURN OF INCOME OF RS. 2,42,008/-. 3. AS IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FIL ED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED ADDITIONAL EV IDENCES WHICH HAVE BEEN DENIED TO BE ADMITTED BY LD. CIT(A). ITA NOS. 1016 & 1357/D/2011 4 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, IT WAS THE COMMON CONTENTION OF BOTH THE PARTIES THAT IT WILL SERVE THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE IF THE ASSESSMENT IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF AO WITH A DIRECTION TO F RAME DENOVO ASSESSMENT AFTER PROVIDING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNI TY OF HEARING. LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ASSURED US THAT ASSESSEE WIL L EXTEND FULL COOPERATION DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE AO IF THE PROCEEDINGS ARE RESTORED BACK TO HIS FILE. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF BOTH THE PAR TIES AND AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND ORDER PASSED BY CIT(A), WE CONSIDER IT JUST AND PROPER THAT INTEREST OF JUSTIC E WILL BE FULFILLED IF THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF AO WITH A DI RECTION TO FRAME DENOVO ASSESSMENT AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE O PPORTUNITY OF HEARING. IT HAS ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED ABOVE THAT LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ASSURED US TO EXTEND FULL COOPERATION ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE IN COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT BEFORE AO. TH EREFORE, WE RESTORE THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT TO THE FILE OF AO W ITH A DIRECTION TO FRAME DENOVO ASSESSMENT AFTER PROVIDING THE ASSESSE E WITH A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING ON ALL THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL. AS WE ARE RESTORING THE ENTIRE ASSESSMENT TO THE FILE OF AO, WE DO NOT CONSIDER IT PROPER TO GO INTO THE MERITS OF THE ADDITION AND DELETION CHALLENGED IN THE CROSS APPEALS. ITA NOS. 1016 & 1357/D/2011 5 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS WILL BE CONSIDER ED TO BE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE MANNER AFORESAID. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.05.201 1 SD/- SD/- (B.C. MEENA) (I.P. BANSAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDI CIAL MEMBER DATED: 18.05.2011 *KAVITA CHOPRA COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR