Mohit Vohra, New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 2382/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 238220114 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 1
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SARABHJIT SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJNISH AGARWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 153A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC - 1 , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM ITA NO. 2382 /DEL/201 4 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2007 - 08 MOHIT VOHRA, A - 13, 1 ST FLOOR, EAST UTTAM NAGAR, NEW DELHI - 110059 VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE - 12 , NEW DEL HI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AERPV3311C ASSESSEE BY : SH . RAJ NISH AGARWAL , CA REVENUE BY : SH. SARABHJIT SINGH, DR DATE OF HEARING : 15 .0 9 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 . 09 .2015 ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19 .02.2014 OF LD. CIT (A) - V I , NEW DELHI . 2 . FOLLOWING GROUND S HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEAL: 1. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRE D IN SUMMARILY DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT DISCUSSING THE GROUNDS ON MERITS. 2. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN TAKING UP THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER FIVE YEARS AND DISMISSING THE SA ME ON THE BASIS OF A SINGLE COMMON NOTICE FOR THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 & 2008 - 09 IN WHICH THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN STUCK OFF IN THE NOTICE (SPECIMEN ENCLOSED). ITA NO.2382 /DEL /2014 MOHIT VOHRA 2 3. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN STATING THAT THE AS SESSEE HAS NOT ATTENDED THE HEARINGS ON VARIOUS DATES WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY SUCH NOTICES EXCEPT THE ONE NOTICE DATED 22.11.2013 (AFFIDAVIT ENCLOSED). 4. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT WHILE THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS A SEARCH CASE AND THE ASSESSMENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE U/S 153A THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S 147/143(3) WHICH IS ILLEGAL, VOID AB INITIO AND THUS NOT A VALID ORDER IN THE EYES OF LAW. 5. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE, IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT THEREBY CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 43,000/ - MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED EXTRA INCOME WITHOUT AN Y BASIS. 6. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WHILE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT GET JUSTICE FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HE WAS DENIED THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE BY THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO. 7. THE ASSESSEE PRAYS THAT THE MATTER BE REMANDED BACK TO T HE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. 8. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD/ALTER ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 9. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER. ITA NO.2382 /DEL /2014 MOHIT VOHRA 3 3 . IN THIS CASE , THE ASSESSEE DECLARED AN I NC OME OF RS. 1 ,37,631/ - AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT ON AN INCOME OF RS. 1,80,631/ - AFTER MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 43,000/ - . THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE ASSESSEE S APPE AL ON ACCOUNT OF NON - PROSECUTION. 4 . AT THE VERY OUTSET OF THE HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ATTEND ED THE HEARING ON VARIOUS DATES WHEREAS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED AN Y SUCH NOTICES EXCEPT THE ONE NOTICE DATED 22.11.2013 AND IN THIS REGARD THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN AFFIDAVIT. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE NON - APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT INCIDENTAL AND DELIBERATE. ACCORDINGLY, H E PRAYED TO RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A). 5 . THE LD. DR DID NOT OBJECT TO THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE OF RESTORING THE MATTER BACK TO THE CIT(A) 6 . I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. AFTER GOIN G THROUGH THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AN D AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, IT APPEARS THAT NON - APPEARANCE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT INCIDENTAL AND THE AMOUNT OF ADDITION IS VERY MEAGER I.E. RS. 43,000/ - . IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER IN THE INTEREST OF JUST ICE AND EQUITY THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO BE DECIDED ITA NO.2382 /DEL /2014 MOHIT VOHRA 4 AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 7 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES . ( ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT ON 15 /09 /2015 ) SD/ - (N. K. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 15 /09 /2015 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR