Bhartiya Online Service Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 1164/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4439 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ANSUL SAEHHAR
• Section: 142(1); 143(2); 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1164/DEL/2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2012-13 BHARTIYA ONLINE SERVICE PVT. LTD., SUIT NO. 602, 6 TH FLOOR, PEACH TREE COMPLEX, C BLOCK, SUSHANT LOK PHASE-I, GURGAON - 122002, HARYANA VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(4), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AACCB9721C ASSESSEE BY : SH. ANSUL SAEHHAR, CA REVENUE BY : SH. RAJESH KUMAR, SR. DR DATE OF HEAR ING: 18 . 0 2 .20 20 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 20 .0 2 .20 20 ORDER PER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-2, NEW DELHI DATED 30.1 1.2016. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE E- FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME ON 05.09.2013 DECLARING TOTAL INCO ME OF RS. 5,87,910/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY THRO UGH CASS AND NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 D ATED 06.08.2013 WAS ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. F URTHER, NOTICE U/S 142(1) DATED 09.01.2014 WAS ALSO ISSUED ASKING FOR SPECIFIC DETAILS/DOCUMENTS. 3. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY U/ S 144 DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,43,81,180/-. A GGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A), OWING TO NON-A TTENDANCE ON THE PART OF ITA NO. 1164/DEL/2017 BHARTIYA ONLINE SERVICE PVT. LTD. 2 THE ASSESSEE SUMMARILY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE EX-PARTE WITHOUT ADJUDICATING THE MERITS OF THE CASE. 4. BEFORE US, THE LD. AR ARGUED THAT GIVEN AN OPPOR TUNITY HE WOULD REPRESENT AND FILE ALL THE DETAILS BEFORE THE REVEN UE AUTHORITIES. THE LD. DR DID NOT OBJECT TO THE PROPOSITION. 5. HENCE, KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE HEREBY REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A) TO ADJUD ICATE THE ISSUES ON MERITS BY WAY OF A SPEAKING ORDER. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSE SSEE TO COMPLY THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND DIREC T THAT NO UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENTS WOULD BE SOUGHT BY THE ASSESSEE WHILE COMPLYING PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A). 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20/02/2020. SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (DR. B. R. R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNT ANT MEMBER DATED: 20/02/2020 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR