Mr. Hari Kishore Singh, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2912/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6518 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 6 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 26-10-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 11-06-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRIT LAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ADITYA RAJ SINGH
• Keywords: Capital receipt

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: C NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2912/DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 MR. HARI KISHORE SINGH, VS. ITO, WARDS 23(2), (THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIR NEW DELHI SMT. PRATIBHA SINGH WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE) Q-33, TARA APARTMENTS, ALAKNANDA, NEW DELHI 110 019 (PAN: AUTPS1626B) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. ADITYA RAJ SINGH, ADV. REVENUE BY : SH. AMRIT LAL, SR. DR ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.1.2012 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-IX, NEW DELHI RE LATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FAC TS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN TREATING A SU M OF RS. 4,00,000/- AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES OF THE ASSESSEE INSTEAD OF CAPITAL RECEIPT FROM SALE O F CAR OF THE ASSESSEE. 2 2. THAT IN ANY CASE AND IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF AO IN NOT TREATING THE RECEIPT FROM SALE OF OLD CAR OF TH E ASSESSEE AS CAPITAL RECEIPTS IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND T HE SAME MAY KINDLY BE REVERSED. 3. THAT IN ANY CASE AND IN ANY OF THE MATTER LD. CIT(A ) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AO AND IN NOT DELETING VARIOUS ADDITIONS / DISALLOWANCES MADE BY THE AO AS THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS NOT SUSTAINABLE ON VARIOUS LEGAL AND FACTUAL GROUNDS AND MORE SO BY RECORDING INCORRECT FACTS AND FINDING. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE LAVE TO ADD, MODIFY, AMEND OR DELETE ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND ALL THE ABOVE GROUNDS ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER. 2. FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE NO T DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, HENCE, THE SAME ARE NOT REPEAT ED HERE FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL OF THE AS SESSEE HAS FILED THE APPLICATION FOR BRINGING THE LEGAL HEIRS OF DE CEASED SH. HARI KISHORE SINGH (ASSESSEE) ON RECORD. IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION, LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED A DEATH CERTIFI CATE DATED 29.12.2015 IN RESPECT OF LATE SH. HARI KISHORE SIN GH. HE STATED THAT SH. HARI KISHORE SINGH HAS DIED ON 28.8.2013. HE FU RTHER STATED THAT SMT. PRATIBHA SINGH, WIFE OF THE DECEASED IS THE SOLE SURVIVING LEGAL 3 HEIR OF LATE SH. HARI KISHORE SINGH AND REQUESTED T HAT KEEPING IN VIEW OF RULE 26 OF THE ITAT RULES, 1963 THE LEGAL HEIR O F LATE SH. HARI KISHORE SINGH MAY BE BROUGHT ON RECORD. HE HAS ALSO FILED THE REVISED FORM 36 AND COPY OF THE SAME GIVEN TO LD. DR, WHO H AS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION IN BRINGING THE LEGAL HEIR OF THE APPLICA NT ON RECORD. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE DRAW OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30.1.2012 IN WHICH LD. CIT(A) HAS DECID ED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESEE WITHOUT PROVIDING SUFFICIENT OP PORTUNITY FOR SUBSTANTIATING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DID NOT RAISE ANY OBJECTION ON THE REQUEST OF THE LD. C OUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE OF BRINING THE LEGAL HEIR ON RECORD. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. WE FIND THAT LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED T HAT SMT. PRATIBHA SINGH, WIDOW OF SH. HARI KISHORE SINGH MAY BE BROUG HT ON RECORD FOR WHICH LD. DR HAS NO OBJECTION. KEEPING IN VIEW THE ABOVE, WE ALLOW THE AFORESAID REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASS ESSEE. WE HAVE ALSO CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSE D BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THE REVENUE AUTHORITY HAS NOT GIVEN SUF FICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR SUBSTANTIATING THE CLAIM. THER EFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE MATTER REQU IRES THOROUGH EXAMINATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE AO. HENCE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, 4 THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE ARE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH UNDER THE LAW, AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OP PORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FULLY COOPERATE WITH THE AO AND PRODUCE ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS TO SUBSTANTIATE HER CLAIM AND DO NOT TAKE ANY UNNECESSARY ADJOURN MENT. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14/12/2016 . SD/- SD/- [O.P. KANT] [H.S. SIDHU] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE 14/12/2016 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES 5