Rahul Aul, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 1877/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 187720114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 22-08-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 24-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATPAL SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: V K GUREJA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 69C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1877/DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-2007 RAHUL AUL, C/O K.B. CHANDNA & CO., E-27, SOUTH EXTENSION-II, NEW DELHI. PAN NO. ADHPA5726F VS. ITO, WARD 24(1), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. V.K. GUREJA, CA RESPONDENT BY : SH. SATPAL SINGH, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 23/08/2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21/09/2012 O R D E R THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 30/11/2011 FOR A.Y. 2006-07. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE AS PER THE STATEMENT OF FACTS FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE, IN THE RELEVANT ASSES SMENT YEAR, WAS EMPLOYED WITH INFOSYS TECHNOLOGY LTD. AND FILED HIS INCOME-TAX RETURN DECLARING INCOME OF RS. 88,835/-. THE AO NOTICED T HAT ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED INCOME FROM BUSINESS AND HOUSE PROPERTY. HE HAS OBSERVED THAT AS PER THE INFORMATION THROUGH AIR IT TRANSPIRED TH AT ASSESSEE HAD MADE PAYMENT THROUGH CREDIT CARD OF CITI BANK AMOUNTING TO RS. 2,07,519/- DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR. SINCE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR IN-SPITE OF VARIOUS NOTICES, AS MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE AO MADE AN ADDITION OF IT A NO. 1877/D/2012 2 RS. 2,07,519/- U/S 69C OBSERVING THAT THE SOURCE OF EXPENDITURE HAD NOT BEEN EXPLAINED. THE ASSESSEE IN ITS STATEMENT OF F ACTS BEFORE LD. CIT(A) HAD STATED THAT HE WAS TRANSFERRED TO BANGALORE AND INTIMATION TO THIS EFFECT WAS GIVEN VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 24/07/2008 TO THE A O. IT IS FURTHER STATED IN THE STATEMENT OF FACTS AS UNDER: - SINCE THE APPELLANT WAS STAYING IN RENTED HOUSE AND AFTER VACATING THE SAID PREMISES, NO SUBSEQUENT NOTICES WERE RECEIVED BY HIM. HOWEVER, THE APPELLANT THROUGH HIS REPRESENTATIVE, MR. MAGO TRIED TO GET IN TOUCH WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SOMEHOW, THE MEETING COULD NOT TAKE PLACE SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT AVAILABLE ON THAT PARTICULAR DAY. THE SAID MR. MAGO HAD AGAIN MEETING WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 22/10/2008. DETAILS OF ALL THE PAYMENTS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF CREDIT CARD FROM APPELLANTS PERSONAL SB ACCOUNT WITH HDFC BANK WERE EXPLAINED AND GIVEN TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT CONSIDER ALL THESE DETAILS AND CONVENIENTLY MADE ADDITION OF THE SAID PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF CREDIT CARD AMOUNTING TO A SUM OF RS. 2,07,519/- AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. 3. LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITION, INTER-ALIA, O BSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SIMPLY GIVEN DETAILS OF THE CHEQUE NUM BERS, DATES AND AMOUNTS VIDE WHICH MONTH WISE PAYMENTS WERE MADE BY HIM IN RESPECT OF THE CREDIT CARD DUES OF RS. 2,02,720/-, WITHOUT EXP LAINING THE SOURCES OF THESE PAYMENTS. 4. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING TWO GROUNDS OF APPEAL: - 1. THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED BY SUSTAINING ADDITION OF RS. 2,07,519/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS WITH THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPELLANT, WHO APPEARED BEFORE HER ON THE IT A NO. 1877/D/2012 3 DATE OF HEARING, THEREBY DENYING THE OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT TO PRESENT HIS CASE WHICH IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PA RTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE RECORD OF THE CASE. 6. I FIND FROM THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE LOWER REVENUE AUTHORITIES THAT THE ASSESSEES CONTENTIONS HAVE NOT PROPERLY BEEN APPRE CIATED AS NO DISCUSSIONS TOOK PLACE WITH HIM AND, THEREFORE, I S ET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO TO GIVE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE PASSI NG THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DE-NOVO. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21/09/2012 SD/- (S.V. MEHROTRA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 21/09/2012 *KAVITA COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR