M/s. New India City Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2094/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7019 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 10-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: F R MEENA
• Section: 143(3); 115JB

Judgement Text

I.T.A .NO.-2094/DEL/2016 NEW INDIA CITY DEVELOPERS P.LTD. VS ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-I NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-2094/DEL/2016 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2008-09) NEW INDIA CITY DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD., B-44, IIND FLOOR, JANGPURA, NEW DELHI-110014. PAN-AAACK0016B ( APPELLANT) VS ITO, WARD-13(2), NEW DELHI. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SH.ROHIT GARG, CA REVENUE BY S H. F.R.MEENA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 10 . 11 .2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12.01.2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 26.02.2016 OF CIT(A)-20, NEW DELHI PERT AINING TO 200809 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. SINCE THE PARTIES WERE HEARD ONLY IN RESPECT TO THE ISSUE ARISING IN GROUND NO. 1, THE SAME IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS BAD IN LAW AND O N THE FACTS OF THE CASE. THE PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) WAS ILLEGAL AND NOT ACCO RDING TO ACT. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE RETURNED A LOSS INCOME OF RS.4,17,875/- AND SHOWED BOOK PROFIT OF RS.1,14,02, 558/- UNDER SECTION 115JB OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECT ION 143(1) AND THEREAFTER PICKED UP FOR SCRUTINY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE SCRUTINY PRO CEEDINGS MADE AN ADDITION BY WAY OF A DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS.32,16,285/ -. 3. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE ASSESSEE CAME IN APPEAL B EFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. SINCE DESPITE OPPORTUNITY, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO A PPEAR FOR HEARING ON 07/09/2015; 20/08/2015; 07/01/2016 AND FINALLY ON 19/01/2016, T HE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE ASSESSEE IS AN APPEAL BEF ORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. THE LD. AR, SH. ROHIT GARG, CA APPEARING ON BEH ALF OF THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT ENGAGED BY THE ASSESS EE SH. HARISH GOEL FOR SOME REASON FAILED TO APPEAR AS A RESULT OF WHICH THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON WRONG FACTS HAVE BEEN SUSTAINED. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WAS HIS LIMITED PRAYER THAT THE ISSUES PAGE 2 OF 2 I.T.A .NO.-2094/DEL/2016 NEW INDIA CITY DEVELOPERS P.LTD. VS ITO MAY BE REMANDED TO THE CIT(A) AND HE GAVE HIS ORAL UNDERTAKING THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL PARTICIPATE IN THE PROCEEDINGS AS NON PARTICIPATION BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS NOT MADE KNOWN TO THE ASSESSEE. THE SAID PRAYER WAS NOT OBJECTED T O BY THE LD. SR. DR. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE AFORE-MENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WH EREIN DESPITE ENGAGING A COUNSEL TO REPRESENT IT THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED O N ACCOUNT OF NO FAULT OF ITS OWN RESULTING IN THE PASSING OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER EX-P ARTE. ACCORDINGLY, ACCEPTING THE ORAL UNDERTAKING GIVEN BY THE LD. AR, THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASIDE AND THE ISSUE IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUN ITY OF BEING HEARD. 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH OF JANUARY 2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI