Mr. Sanjay, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2326/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3919 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 24-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KISHORE B
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A NO. 2326/DEL/10 ASSTT. YEAR 2003-04 MR. SANJAY 20A, GREEN MEADOWS FARMS, P.O. SATBARI, MEHRAULI, NEW DELHI. VS. ITO WARD 24(3), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI ARUN KISHORE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI KISHORE B, SR. DR. ORDER PER RAJPAL YADAV, JM: THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 25 TH FEBRUARY, 2010 PASSED FOR ASSTT. YEAR 2003-04. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN 7 GROUNDS OF APPEAL WHICH ARE NO T IN CONSONANCE WITH RULE 8 OF ITAT RULES AND ARE DESCRIPTIVE IN NA TURE. IN BRIEF, THE ISSUE PLEADED BEFORE US BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF ` 25,14,400/- WHICH WAS MADE BY THE AO BY DISBELIEVING THE CLAIM OF AGRICUL TURAL INCOME. HE FURTHER PLEADED THAT PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING WAS NOT GRANTED BY THE ITA NO. 2326/DEL/10 ASSTT. YEAR 2003-04 2 LD. REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THEREFORE THE ORDERS DESERVES TO BE SET ASIDE. 2. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE VERY OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS A SUFFICIENT AGRICULTURAL LAND WHICH H AS GENERATED AGRICULTURAL INCOME. HE PLACED ON RECORD THE HISTOR Y OF ASSESSEE FROM ASSTT. YEAR 2002-03 UPTO 2007-08, WHEREIN AGRICULTU RAL INCOME HAS BEEN DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ACCEPTED BY THE DEPAR TMENT. ON THE STRENGTH OF THESE DETAILS, HE SUBMITTED THAT ISSUE REQUIRED TO BE READJUDICATED AT THE LEVEL OF AO BECAUSE ASSESSMEN T ORDER IS AN EX PARTE ORDER. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND RELIED U PON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). 3. WE HAVE DULY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTION AND GONE THROUGH THE RECORD CAREFULLY. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS FIL ED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 31 ST MARCH, 2004 DECLARING AN INCOME OF ` 54,600/-. APART FROM THIS INCOME, ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED AGRICULTURAL INCOME O F ` 25,14,400/-./ ACCORDING TO THE AO, A NOTICE U/S 143(2) WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE THROUGH AFFIXTURE ON 24.12.2004. THE ASSESSEE DID N OT APPEAR IN RESPONSE TO THIS NOTICE. IT EMERGES OUT FROM THE AS STT. ORDER THAT FRESH NOTICES WERE ISSUED IN THE MONTH OF SEPTEMBER, 2005 AND AO HAS PASSED THE ASSTT. ORDER EX PARTE ON 13 TH MARCH, 2006. SINCE NO EVIDENCE ITA NO. 2326/DEL/10 ASSTT. YEAR 2003-04 3 WAS AVAILABLE IN SUPPORT OF THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME , HE MADE THE ADDITION OF ` 25,14,400/-. AT PAGE NO. 2 OF THE PAPER BOOK, ASSES SEE HAS FILED THE FOLLOWING DETAILS WHICH EXHIBITS THE AGRICULTURAL I NCOME DISCLOSED BY HIM AND HOW THAT HAS BEEN TREATED BY THE REVENUE :- REG:SH. SANJAY /O SH. KRISHAN KUMAR A CASE OF ACCEPTED HISTORY FROM A.Y. 2002-03 TO 20 07-08 ASSTT. YEAR TOTAL TAXABLE INCOME AGRICULTURAL INCOME REMARKS 2007-08 104,500.00 3,040,700.00 ACCEPTED IN APPEAL BY CIT(A) XXIII NEW DELHI AFTER ENQUIRY REPORT U/S 250(4) OF THE ACT 2006-07 61,300.00 3,413,100.00 ACCEPTED U/S 143(1) OF THE I.T. ACT 2005-06 55,400.00 3,782,000.00 SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT ACCEPTED U/S 143(3) 2004-05 56,800.00 3,624,000.00 ACCEPTED U/S 143(1) OF THE I.T. ACT 2003-04 54,600.00 2,514,400.00 PENDING IN APPEAL BEFORE ITAT BENCH G NEW DELHI 2002-03 53,200.00 2,310,200.00 ACCEPTED U/S 143(1) OF THE IT ACT 4. AFTER PERUSAL OF THESE DETAILS, WE ARE OF THE OP INION THAT ASSESSEE HAS BEEN SHOWING SUFFICIENT AGRICULTURAL INCOME IN THE EARLIER YEARS AS WELL AS IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS, WHICH GIVES PRIME FACIE AN INDICATION THAT HE IS HAVING AGRICULTURAL LAND WHICH GIVES RIS E TO AGRICULTURAL INCOME. BEFORE LD. CIT(A), HE HAS PLEADED THAT HE IS HAVING 37 ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL LAND WHICH CAN GIVE RISE THIS MUCH OF INCOME. TAKING INTO ITA NO. 2326/DEL/10 ASSTT. YEAR 2003-04 4 CONSIDERATION ALL THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES COU PLED WITH THE FACT THAT ASSTT. ORDER IS AN EX PARTE ORDE, WE DEEM IT A PPROPRIATE THAT ENDS OF JUSTICE WOULD MEET, IF WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED OR DERS AND RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSEE WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF HIS E XPLANATION. 5. OUR OBSERVATION WOULD NOT INJURE OR IMPAIR THE C ASE OF AO AND WOULD NOT CAUSE ANY PREJUDICE TO THE DEFENCE / EXPL ANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. LD. AO SHALL DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTE R PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24.5.2011. SD/- SD/- [K.G. BANSAL] [RAJPAL YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 24.5.2011 VEENA COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) TRUE COPY BY ORDER 5. DR, ITAT DEPUTY R EGISTRAR, ITAT