Pawan Kumar Gupta, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 1285/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4089 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 12-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 14-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANUSHA KHURANA
• Assessee Lawyers: D M SINHA
• Keywords: Additional evidence

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F : NEW DELHI DELHI BENCH F : NEW DELHI DELHI BENCH F : NEW DELHI DELHI BENCH F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA, VICE PRESIDENT BEFORE SHRI G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA, VICE PRESIDENT BEFORE SHRI G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA, VICE PRESIDENT BEFORE SHRI G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI A.D.JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.D.JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.D.JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.D.JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1285/DEL/2011 ITA NO.1285/DEL/2011 ITA NO.1285/DEL/2011 ITA NO.1285/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007- -- -08 0808 08 SHRI PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA, SHRI PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA, SHRI PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA, SHRI PAWAN KUMAR GUPTA, C/O SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, C/O SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, C/O SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, C/O SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, ADVOCATE, ADVOCATE, ADVOCATE, ADVOCATE, VISHWAS NAGAR, VISHWAS NAGAR, VISHWAS NAGAR, VISHWAS NAGAR, (NEAR 18 QUARTER CHOWK), (NEAR 18 QUARTER CHOWK), (NEAR 18 QUARTER CHOWK), (NEAR 18 QUARTER CHOWK), SHAHDARA, SHAHDARA, SHAHDARA, SHAHDARA, DELHI DELHI DELHI DELHI 110 032. 110 032. 110 032. 110 032. PAN NO.AAIPG4877D. PAN NO.AAIPG4877D. PAN NO.AAIPG4877D. PAN NO.AAIPG4877D. VS. VS. VS. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD WARD WARD WARD- -- -35(4), 35(4), 35(4), 35(4), NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI D.M.SINHA, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENT BY : SMT.ANUSHA KHURANA, DR. ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA, VP : PER G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA, VP : PER G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA, VP : PER G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA, VP : THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR AY 2007-08, TAKING TH E FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THAT NO REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO EXP LAIN HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD.CIT. 2. THAT NO NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE I.T.ACT SERVED ON THE PETITIONER WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD. 3. THAT THE ASSESSEE MOVED AN APPLICATION U/R 46A, OF THE INCOME TAX RULE, AND THE SAME REMAINED UNDISPOS ED. ITA-1285/DEL/2011 2 4. THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED DETAILS OF LOAN CONFIRMATION/NAME AND ADDRESS, AFFIDAVIT AND PAN NO . OF THE PARTIES. 5. THAT THE PETITIONER RESERVED HIS RIGHT TO FILE DETAIL/MORE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF THE HE ARING OF THE CASE. 2. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE HAS STATED AT THE BAR THAT GROUND NO.2 IS NOT PRESSED. HENCE, TH E SAME IS REJECTED. 3. THE CHIEF GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO ADJUDICATE ON THE APPLICATION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE FOR ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. THE IMPUGNED ORDER FINDS MENT ION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT BROUGHT ON RECORD ANY EVIDENCE AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, TO JUSTIFY THE CREDITWORTHI NESS OF THE LOAN CREDITORS; THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY E VIDENCE IN THIS REGARD BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ALSO; THAT BY MERE LY FILING THE DETAILS OF THE LOANS OBTAINED, THE ASSESSEE HAD JUST REITER ATED THE STAND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO; AND THAT THE ASSESSE E HAD FAILED TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PERSON FROM WHOM HE HAD SOURCED THE LOANS. 4. THUS, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT EVEN ADVERTED TO BY THE LEARNED CIT(A). 5. THE EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPRISES OF CONFIRMATION, AFFIDAVIT AND PAN NUMBER IN RESPECT OF THE LOAN RAI SED DURING THE YEAR. THIS EVIDENCE APPARENTLY GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE AD DITION MADE AND IT THUS REQUIRES TO BE ADJUDICATED UPON. ACCORDINGLY, THIS MATTER IS REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, TO B E DECIDED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, ON CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCE FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE WILL BE AFFORDED ADEQUATE O PPORTUNITY TO ITA-1285/DEL/2011 3 PROVE ITS CASE AND THE ASSESSEE, ON ITS PART, NO DO UBT, SHALL COOPERATE WITH THE AO. 6. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES, THE APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON CONCLUSION OF HEARING ON 12 TH MAY, 2011. SD/- SD/- (A.D.JAIN) (A.D.JAIN) (A.D.JAIN) (A.D.JAIN) (G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA) (G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA) (G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA) (G.E.VEERABHADRAPPA) JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT DATED : 12.05.2011. VK. COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR