ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Standard Times Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1469/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6239 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARMITAM VISHVASH
• Assessee Lawyers: SUMIT GOYAL ADVS
• Keywords: Business income; Document seized; Opportunity of being heard; Documents seized

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI O.P. KANT ITA NO. 1469 /DEL/201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 200 9 - 1 0 ACIT, VS. STANDARD TIMES PVT. LTD., CENTRAL CIRCLE - 17, 4827/ 24, ANSARI ROAD, NEW DELHI. DARYAGANJ, NEW DELHI. (PAN: AA BCS3615B ) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NOS. 1689 TO 1693/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2004 - 05 TO 2008 - 09 STANDARD TIMES PVT. LTD., VS. DEPUTY CIT, 4827/2 4, ANSARI ROAD, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 17, DARYAGANJ, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (PAN: AABCS3615B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: S/ SHRI RAJ KUMAR GUPTA & SUMIT GOYAL, ADVS. DEPARTM ENT BY: SHRI PARMITAM VISHVASH (CIT - DR) DATE OF HEARING : 3 0 . 0 2 .201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30 : 0 3 .201 6 ORDER PER BENCH: THESE ARE THE CROSS APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE PARTIES RAIS ING THEIR RESPECTIVE GRIEVANCES AGAINST THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER. THOUGH IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS GIVEN RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1 CRORE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF ESTIMATED 2 BUSINESS INCOME, QUESTIO NED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE ITAT BUT WITH ALL FAIRNESS, THE LEARNED AR POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE DUE TO SOME UNAVOIDABLE PROBLEMS LIKE DELAYED SUPPLY OF THE COPIES OF THE REQUIRED SEIZED DOCUMENTS TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, SERIOUS ILL NESS OF WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE SUFFERING FROM NON - FUNCTIONING OF BOTH HER KIDNEYS PROBLEM, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT REPRESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW PROPERLY. HE THUS REQUESTED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONSIDER AND DECIDE THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE APPEALS BY THE PARTIES AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED CIT(DR) OPPOSED THE ABOVE REQUEST OF THE LEARNED AR WITH THIS SUBM ISSION THAT MORE THAN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES WERE PROVIDED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW TO THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT ITS CASE TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE DID NOT BOTHER TO COMPLY WITH. IN THIS REGARD, SHE REFERRED PARA NO. 3 OF THE FIRST APPELLATE ORDER WHEREIN TH E LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS MADE REFERENCE OF THE DATES FIXED FOR HEARING WHICH THE ASSESSEE DID NOT AVAIL. SHE ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT DESERVE ANY FURTHER OPPORTUNITY. 2. THE LEARNED AR REJOINED WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT DUE TO THE ABOVE EXPLAINED REASONS IT WAS BEYOND CONTROL AND POWER OF THE ASSESSEE TO PURSUE 3 ITS CASE PROPERLY BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND IT WAS ALWAYS IN THE INTEREST OF THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT ITS CASE PROPERLY BUT IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE DUE TO ABOVE REASONS AS IT IS VERY MUCH EVIDENT THAT THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW I.E. ASSESSMENT ORDER AND FIRST APPELLATE ORDER HAVE BEEN PASSED EX PARTE. 3. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS IN ITS TOTALITY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO DOUBT THE EXPLANATION OF TH E ASSESSEE INCLUDING DELAYED SUPPLY OF THE COPIES OF THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND SERIOUS ILLNESS OF WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PURSUE ITS CASE PROPERLY WHICH ULTIMATELY LED PASSING OF ASSESSMENT O RDER AND FIRST APPELLATE ORDER EX PARTE AND ABOVE ALL THE ASSESSEE WITH ALL FAIRNESS HAS ALSO REQUESTED FOR SETTING ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW PASSED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08 WHEREIN THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS GIVEN RELIEF TO THE ASS ESSEE BY DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1 CRORE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF ESTIMATED BUSINESS INCOME, QUESTIONED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE ITAT. WE THUS IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE ABOVE APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE PARTIES AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING 4 TO THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE PARTIES ARE THUS SET ASIDE FOR THE STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4 . IN RESULT, THE APPEAL S ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER P RONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30S . 0 3 . 201 6 SD/ - SD/ - ( O.P . K A NT ) ( I.C. UDHIR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED: 30 / 0 3 /201 6 MOHAN LAL COPY FORWARDED TO: 1) APPELLANT 2) RESPONDENT 3) CIT 4) CIT(APPEALS) 5) DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR DATE DRAFT DICTATED DIRECTLY ON COMPUTER 30 . 0 3 .201 6 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHO R 30 . 0 3 .2016 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. 30 .03 .2016 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 30 . 0 3 .2016 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 30 .03 .2016 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLE RK 30 . 0 3 .2016 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.