Ramesh Kumar Verma (HUF), New Delhi V. ITO Ward 42(2), New Delhi

ITA 1490/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8516 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 21-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: JYOTI
• Section: 68; 69C; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. BRR KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1490/Del/2019 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Ramesh Kumar Verma (HUF), 59- Bank Vihar, Pitampura, New Delhi PIN: 1100 02 Vs. ITO, 42(2), New Delhi PAN :AAPHR6862I (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 06.02.2019 of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-14, New Delhi for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. The basic grievance of assessee is against ex parte disposal of its appeal by learned first appellate authority. Appellant by Shri Anand Chaudhdari & Ms. Jyoti Sharma, Adv. Assessee by Shri Shankar Gupta, SR. DR Date of hearing 05.07.2022 Date of pronouncement 11.07.2022 2 ITA No.1490/Del./2019 3. We have heard Shri Anand Chaudhari, learned authorized representative of the assessee and Shri Shankar Gupta, learned Departmental Representative. 4. Briefly, the facts are, assessee is a resident hindu undivided family. For the assessment year under dispute, assessee filed its return of income on 22.08.2015, declaring income of Rs.9,73,720. While completing the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 27.12.2017, the Assessing Officer made the following additions: i) Addition on account of unexplained Rs.91,90,707 credit under Section 68 of the Act. ii) Addition on account of unexplained Rs. 2,75,721 expenditure under Section 69C of the Act. 5. As a result, the income declared by assessee was enhanced to Rs.1,04,40,150. Against the assessment order so passed, assessee preferred an appeal before learned Commissioner (Appeals). However, by the impugned order, learned Commissioner (Appeals) proceeded to dispose of the appeal ex parte by confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 3 ITA No.1490/Del./2019 6. Having considered rival submissions and perused material available on record, we find, in response to the hearing notices issued by learned first appellate authority, assessee sought more time to furnish its reply along with supporting evidences. However, the request of the assessee to grant more time was rejected by learned Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that information in relation to queries put to the assessee are available in public domain and secondly, on the basis of similar facts, learned first appellate authority has decided an appeal in case of another assessee. Accordingly, he proceeded to dispose of the appeal ex parte and confirmed the additions. Facts on record reveal that there was no deliberate intention of the assessee to delay the proceedings before learned first appellate authority. Therefore, in our view, learned Commissioner (Appeals) should have granted reasonable opportunity to the assessee to furnish his reply with supporting evidences. Merely because, certain informations are available in public domain and a similar case has been disposed of, cannot be a ground to deny reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4 ITA No.1490/Del./2019 7. In view of the aforesaid, we set aside the impugned order of learned Commissioner (Appeals) and restore the matter back to him for de novo adjudication on merits after due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Grounds are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 11 th July, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- ( DR. BRR KUMAR ) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: th July, 2022. Mohan Lal Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi 5 ITA No.1490/Del./2019 Sl. No. Particulars Date 1. Date of dictation (Order drafted through Dragon software): 06.07.2022 2. Date on which the draft of order is placed before the Dictating Member: 07.07.2022 3. Date on which the draft of order is placed before the other Member: 4. Date on which the approved draft of order comes to the Sr. PS/PS: 08.07.2022 5. Date of which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement: 08.07.2022 6. Date on which the final order received after having been singed/pronounced by the Members: 11.07.2022 7. Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT: 12.07.2022 8. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 12.07.2022 9. Date on which files goes to the Head Clerk: 10. Date on which file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order: 11. Date of dispatch of order: