Kamal Agarwal, Noida V. ITO WARD - 2(1), Noida

ITA 1543/DEL/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9666 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 03-09-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAURAV PUNDIR
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI SMC-1 BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING ) BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1543/DEL/2020 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 KAMAL AGARWAL, H.NO.63, RAIL VIHAR, SECTOR-33, NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH-201301. PAN-ADDPA8383Q VS ITO, WARD-2(1), NOIDA. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH.GAURAV PUNDIR, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 20.07.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 29 .07.2021 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2008-09 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-1, NOIDA D ATED 31.01.2018. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT, ON THE FACTS & CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL E X-PARTE SINCE NO NOTICE OF HEARING WAS EVER SERVED UPON THE APPELLANT. 2. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE, THE CIT(A) WAS NOT J USTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL ON 31.01.2018 I.E. AFTER A PERIOD OF 4 M ONTHS APPX. FROM THE LAST DATE OF HEARING I.E08.09.2017. THE IMPUGNED O RDER IS OPPOSED TO PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE, THE CIT(A) WAS NOT J USTIFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL MERELY ON THE GROUND OF NON-PROSECUTION. AS PER THE JUDICIAL OPINION, HE SHOULD HAVE PASSED THE ORDER ON MERITS AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT FILE. HAD HE GONE THROUGH THE FILE, HE COULD NOT HAVE ITA NO.1543/DEL/2020 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 PAGE | 2 SUSTAINED THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF CAPITAL GAIN I N AS MUCH AS THERE WAS NO MATERIAL ON RECORD FOR MAKING SUCH ADDITION SIN CE THE APPELLANT HAD NEVER SOLD THE LAND DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERA TION. 2. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 12.05.2021. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT THROUGH SPEED POST TO THE ADDRESS PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE NOTICE IS RETURNED BACK UNSERVED. 3. LD. SR. DR SUBMITTED THAT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BE DISMISSED. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE LD. SR. DR AND PERUSED THE MATE RIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS SEEN THAT BEFORE LD. CIT(A), TWO OPPORTUNITIE S WERE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. SINCE NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSE SSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICES THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBL E SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS B. N. BHATTACHARYA (1997) 118 ITR 461 (SC) AND DECISION OF DELHI TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN INDIA PVT. LTD. REPORTED IN 38 IT D 320 (DEL.). I HEREBY DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED ON CONCLUSION OF VIRT UAL HEARING ON 29 TH JULY, 2021. SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* ITA NO.1543/DEL/2020 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 PAGE | 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI