Mrs. Kumkum Mathur, Ghaziabad V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 2911/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 291120114 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 23-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: INDRA DEV NARAYAN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence
• Section: 153A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: F NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDI CIAL MEMBER ITA NOS: 2906 TO 2912/DEL/2015 AYS: - 2005-06 TO 2011-12 MRS. KUMKUM MATHUR VS. DCIT. 501, SUNBREEZE TOWER III CENTRAL CIRCLE 20 SECTOR 4, VAISHALI-GHAZIABAD NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI INDRA DEV NARAYAN, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ATIQ AHMAD, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 23.11.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 7.11.2015 O R D E R PER BENCH THESE APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED A GAINST THE COMMON ORDER DATED 27.01.2015 PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, NEW DELHI PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 TO 2011-12. SINCE THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THESE APPEAL ARE COMMON AND IDENTICAL, WE ARE PASSI NG THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, BY DEALING WITH ITA NO. 29 06/DEL2015 (A.Y 2005-06). 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER:- 1. THE LEARNED CIT [A] HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THE NO TICES ISSUED U/S 153A AS VALID-IGNORING THE FACT THAT NO SEARCH TOOK PLAC E ON HER. 2. THE LEARNED CIT [A] HAS ERRED IN HOLDING IN THE INDISCRIMINATE ADDITIONS AS UNEXPLAINED INCOMES AND INVESTMENTS WITHOUT EXER CISE OF SUFFICIENT ITA NOS.2906-2912/DEL/ 2015 SMT. KUMKUM MATHUR VS. DCIT 2 AND REASONABLE FAIR PLAY AND PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AS CORRECT AND HOLDING ALL EXPLANATIONS AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. 3. THE LEARNED CIT [A] HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF THE CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 30,000 IN BANK IGNORING THE EXPLANA TION THAT THEY WERE ON ACCOUNT OF ADVANCES FOR OR REIMBURSEMENT OF TRAV EL EXPENSES ETC OF HER SPOUSE -WHICH WERE MET BY CREDIT CARD PAYMENTS. 4. THE LEARNED CIT [A] HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF ALL INVESTMENTS IN SHARES OF RS 72,129 DURING THE YEAR. 5. THE TAX DEMANDED INCLUDING INTEREST CHARGED U/S 234 B IS WRONG. 6. THAT THE ABOVE GROUNDS ARE INDEPENDENT AND WITH OUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER. 3. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE NOT DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, HENCE, THE SAME ARE NOT REPEATED HERE FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE ASSESSSEE IS MAINLY PRESSING GROUND NO. 2 AT THIS JUNCTURE IN WHICH HE HAS STATED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE EXPLANATIONS AND ADDIT IONAL EVIDENCES FURNISHED DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS AND HAS DISMISS ED THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS SUMMARILY WITHOUT GIVING ANY COGENT REASONS. HE FUR THER STATED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER WITHOUT HEARING THE A SSESSEE AND WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. HE ALSO DRE W OUR ATTENTION TO THE DECISION RENDERED BY DELHI SMC-2 BENCH IN ITA NOS. 4716 TO 4 722/DEL/2015 IN THE CASE OF SHRI KAMLESH BEHARI MATHUR, THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSE SSEE AND SUBMITTED THAT IN THE SAID JUDGMENT THE ISSUE HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE FI LE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION ON THIS GROUND ONLY AND PLEADED THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF TH E LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH DECISION, UNDER THE LAW, AFTER GIVING FULL OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. ITA NOS.2906-2912/DEL/ 2015 SMT. KUMKUM MATHUR VS. DCIT 3 5. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (A). 6. WE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECO RDS, ESPECIALLY THE ORDER PASSED BY THE SMC-2 BENCH OF ITAT, NEW DELHI IN ITA NOS. 4 716 TO 4722/DEL/2015 WHEREIN IN THE CASE OF THE HUSBAND OF THE ASSESSEE, THE MAT TER HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A). FOLLOWING THE SAME AND IN THE IN TEREST OF JUSTICE, WE REMIT THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A) FO R FRESH ADJUDICATION, AFTER GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO DIRECT HIM TO CONSIDER THE EVIDENCES/DOCUMENTS, IF ANY, TO BE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SUBSTANTIATING HIS/HER CLAIM AND DECIDE THE APPEALS, AS PER LAW BY PASSING A SPEAKING ORDER. WE ALSO HASTEN TO ADD THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL EXTEND A LL CO-OPERATION TO THE LD. CIT(A) FOR AN EARLY DISPOSAL OF THE MATTER AND SHALL NOT S EEK UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENTS. 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE 7 APPEALS FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE STAND ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH NOVEMBER,2015. SD/- SD/- (G.D. AGRAWAL) (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) VICE PRESIDENT JUD ICIAL MEMBER DATED: THE 27. 11. 2015 VEENA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) ITA NOS.2906-2912/DEL/ 2015 SMT. KUMKUM MATHUR VS. DCIT 4 5. DR 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR SL. NO. DESCRIPTION DATE 1. DATE OF DICTATION BY THE AUTHOR 23.11.2015 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 24.11. 2015 3. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 4. DRAFT APPROVED BY THE SECOND MEMBER 5. DATE OF APPROVED ORDER COMES TO THE SR. PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER 7. DATE OF FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER