Smt. Hemlata Mittal, Agra V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1662/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 74018 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 13-01-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 21-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATPAL SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: R K MEHRA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Salary income; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 142(1); 234B; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI U. B. S. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T. S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1662 /DEL/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10) SMT. HEMLATA MITTAL, VS. DCIT, CC-12, 67, NEHRU NAGAR, NEW DELHI AGRA, U.P. PAN/GIR NO.: AUEPM3904B (APPELLANTS) (RESPONDENTS) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI R. K. MEHRA, CA DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI SATPAL SINGH, SR. DR ORDER PER U B S BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) - XXI, NEW DELHI DATED 24.01.20134 FOR THE A SSESSMENT YEAR 2009- 10 WHEREIN, THE FOLLOWING THREE GROUNDS HAVE BEEN R AISED: 1) THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE PETITIONERS CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) XXXI, NEW DELHI ERRED IN LAW A ND ON THE FACTS IN NOT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONER TO REPRESENT HER CASE, ALLEGEDLY FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE APPEL LATE ORDER AND IGNORING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 2) THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E PETITIONERS CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE ORDERS OF THE LD. A.O. IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITIONS OF RS.5,50,000/- AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE I. T. ACT, 1961. 3) THAT THE INTERESTS CHARGED U/S 234A AND 234B BE DELETED. I.T.A. NO. 1662/DEL/2013 2 2. THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FIELD BY THE ASSESSEE I N RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 142(1) WHICH WAS THE SAME AS E-FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE IN WHICH ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN INCOME FROM SALARY AND INC OME FROM OTHER SOURCES. AFTER DUE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE, ADDITIO N OF RS.5.50 LACS WAS MADE ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED RS.5. 50 LACS IN THE BANK AND SOURCE AND NATURE OF RECEIPT WAS NOT EXPLAINED. RS .5.50 LACS WAS TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT U/S 68 OF THE ACT AND ADDITION T O THIS EFFECT WAS MADE. 3. THE ASSESSEE TOOK UP THE MATTER IN APPEAL AND AG AINST NOTICE OF HEARING, THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENTS TWICE AND ON THE 3 RD OCCASION, WHEN THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR, EX-PARTE ORDER WAS PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O. WHILE NOTI NG THE PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN IN THE CASE OF CIT VS MULTIPLAN (INDIA) LTD. 3 8 (DEL.) ITD 320 AND LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS CWT (1997) 223 ITR 480 (M P-INDORE BENCH) CASES. 4. AGAINST SUCH ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), ASSESSEE COME UP IN APPEAL AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT FIRSTLY, LD. CIT(A) COULD NOT DI SMISS THE APPEAL WHILE FOLLOWING DECISION AS MENTIONED IN HIS ORDER AND SE CONDLY, HE HAS NOT DISCUSSED THE CASE ON MERIT AT ALL AND JUST CONFIRM ED THE ACTION OF THE A.O., THEREFORE, IT WAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) SHOULD BE SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE APPEAL AFRESH. 5. LD. D.R. DID NOT SERIOUSLY OBJECT IN CASE THE OR DER OF LD. CIT(A) IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A). 6. AFTER HAVING HARD BOTH THE SIDES AND CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED EX-PARTE ORDER WITHOUT DISCUSSING AND CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. EVEN IF THERE IS I.T.A. NO. 1662/DEL/2013 3 NON-COMPLIANCE OF NOTICE OF HEARING, LD. CIT(A) COU LD DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. SO, WE SET ASIDE HIS ORDER AND RESTORE THE APPEAL ON HIS FILE WITH THE DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE APPEAL AFRESH AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS TO THE A.O. WE ORDER AND DIREC T ACCORDINGLY. 7. AS A RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE GETS ACC EPTED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 TH JAN., 2014. SD./- SD./- (T. S. KAPOOR) (U.B.S.BEDI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 17.01.2014. SP. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A)-XXV, NEW DELHI AR, ITAT, 5. CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI NEW DELHI