Surinder Pal, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2244/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 58471 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 18-01-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S MOHANTHY
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJI V JAIN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `G: NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.D. RANJAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T. A. NO.2244/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 SURINDER PAL, INCOME-TAX OFFICER, PLOT NO.29, HASTSAL VILLAGE, VS. WARD 21(3), NEW DE LHI. UTTAM NAGAR, NEW DELHI. PAN: AAOPP0773D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDEN T) APPELLANT BY: SHRI RAJIV JAIN, CA. RESPONDENT BY: SMT. S. MOHANTHY , DR. O R D E R PER K.D. RANJAN, ACCOUNTAT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 7-08 ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEAL S)-XXII, NEW DELHI. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEAL) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND O N FACTS IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.17,86,900/- ON THE BA SIS OF AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEAL) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF 50% OF EXPENSES DEBITED TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS A/C. 2 3. THAT THE LD. CIT(APPEAL) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN SUSTAINING THE EX-PARTE ORDER BY THE A.O. U/S 144. 4. THAT THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER IS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL, BAD IN LAW AND IN VIOLATION OF RUDIMENTARY PRINCIPLES O F CONTEMPORARY JURISPRUDENCE. 3. AT THE OUTSET THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUB MITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD PASSED EX PARTE ORDER UNDER S EC. 144 OF THE ACT. THE NOTICES ISSUED UNDER SEC. 143(2) WERE SENT THROUGH SPEED POST, BUT NONE OF THEM WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE AO. THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE FURT HER SUBMITTED THAT CORRECT ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE IS 2688, DSIDC COMP LEX, NARELA, NEW DELHI-110040. HOWEVER, ADDRESS OF ASSESSEE IN ASSE SSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS APPELLATE ORDER HAS BEEN MENTIONED AS PLOT NO.29, H ASTSAL VILLAGE, UTTAM NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110059. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD NO T RECEIVED NOTICES, HE SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE AS SESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTIONS TO PASS FRESH ASSESSMENT AFTER AFFORDING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OF FICER HAD ISSUED NOTICE UNDER SEC.D 142(1) AT ALL KNOWN ADDRESSES INCLUDING 2688, DSIDC COMPLEX, NARELA, DELHI, 29, HASTAL VILLAGE, UTTAM NAGAR, N EW DELHI AND 442, 108- A, VISHNU GARDEN, NEW DELHI FIXING THE CASE FOR HEA RING ON 5-11-2009, BUT 3 STILL THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM THE ASSESSEE. HOW EVER, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD PASSED EX PARTE ORDER BY DISALLOWING 50% OF EXPENSES DEBITED TO PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND ALSO MAKING ADDITION OF RS.17,86,900/- UNDER SEC. 68 OF THE ACT. SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED EX PARTE ORDER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE FEEL IT NECESSARY TO SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER WITH THE DIRECTION TO COMPLETE ASSESSMENT DE NOVO AFTER AFFORDING THE ASS ESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO D IRECTED TO COOPERATE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN GETTING HIS ASSESSMENT COM PLETED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. THIS DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT O N 18 TH JANUARY, 2012. SD/- SD/- (DIVA SINGH) (K.D. RANJAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 18 TH JANUARY, 2012. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR BY ORDER *MG DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT.