Shri Bhoopender Singh, Ghaziabad V. ITO, Ghaziabad

ITA 237/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 97124 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Next Hearing Date: 24-08-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 13-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC-I : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.237/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 BHOOPENDER SINGH, 83, GIRDHAR ENCLAVE, GT ROAD, NEAR-IME COLLEGE, SAHIBABAD, GHAZIABAD. PAN: ASLPS5382C VS. ITO, WARD-1(2), GHAZIABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJESH MALHOTRA, CA DEPTT. BY : SHRI R.S. NEGI, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 24.08.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 26.08.2015 ORDER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 19.9.2013 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2008-09. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS.3,16,518/- MADE BY THE AO U/S 68 OF THE INCOME-T AX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER ALSO CALLED THE ACT). ITA NO.237/DEL/2014 2 3. SHORN OF UNNECESSARY DETAILS, IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE COMPLETE EVIDENCE BEFORE THE AO WHICH LED TO T HE MAKING OF THIS ADDITION. AN APPLICATION WAS FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FURNISHING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, WHICH FACT IS BORNE OUT FROM P AGE 4 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RECORDED IN HIS ORDER TH AT THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED TIME UPTO 11.9.2013 FOR FILING ADDITIONAL E VIDENCE, WHICH THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE. THIS RESULTED INTO CON FIRMATION OF ADDITION MADE BY THE AO U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 4. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) S REGULAR POSTING IS IN MUZAFAR NAGAR AND HE CAME ON CAMP TO GHAZIABAD, WHE RE THE ASSESSEES APPEAL WAS ALSO LISTED. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH THE LD.CIT(A) GAVE TIME UPTO 11.9.2013 FOR FILING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, BUT ON THAT DATE WHEN THE ASSESEE REACHED THERE, IT WAS FOUND THAT N O SUCH CAMP WAS THERE IN GHAZIABAD. WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY FURTHER OPPORTUNI TY TO THE ASSESSEE, THE LD. CIT(A) DISPOSED OF THE APPEAL. 5. IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION, THE ENDS OF JUSTICE WOULD MEET ADEQUATELY IF THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON THIS ISSUE IS SET ASIDE AND T HE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF AO FOR DECIDING THIS ISSUE AFRESH AS PER LA W, AFTER AFFORDING ITA NO.237/DEL/2014 3 REASONABLE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO LEAD ANY FRESH EVIDENCE BEFORE THE AO IN SUCH FRESH PROCEEDINGS. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 6 TH AUGUST, 2015. SD/- (R.S. SYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 26 TH AUGUST, 2015. DK COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI