Ashok Aggarwal, Delhi V. ACIT, Circle-61(1), New Delhi

ITA 3040/DEL/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4617 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-12-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 18-12-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 26-10-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 234B; 69A

Judgement Text

1 ITA No. 3040/Del/2023 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3040/DEL/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ashok Aggarwal, 2528, Tri Nagar, New Delhi-110035. PAN- AAAPA3860C Vs ACIT, Circle-61(1), New Delhi. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Gaurav Kabra, CA Respondent by Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 19.12.2023 Date of pronouncement 19.12.2023 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 20.09.2023, pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The Learned Assessing Officer has erred in reopening the assessment without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Learned Assessing Officer has erred in adding sum of Rs. 23,90,500/- to the income tax of appellant u / s 69A of the income tax act. 1961, without considering the facts and circumstance of the case. 2 ITA No. 3040/Del/2023 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the various remarks/allegations/inferences drawn by assessing officer for making addition of Rs. 23,90,500/- are erroneous and the addition made is liable to be deleted. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in applying provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in charging interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete the said ground of appeal.” 2. Apropos to the grounds of appeal learned counsel for the assessee submitted that there was no effective representation on behalf of the assessee before the learned CIT(A). Learned counsel further contended that only three notices for hearing were issued and two were during Covid-19 period. It was contended that matter may be restored to the file of learned CIT(A) for decision on merit. 3. Learned DR on the other hand opposed the submissions and supported the orders of authorities below. 4. I have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. I find that the learned CIT(A) had given opportunity of hearing on three occasions. It is stated that two of the notices were issued during Covid-19 period. Considering the material available on record I am of the considered view that in the interest of 3 ITA No. 3040/Del/2023 principles of natural justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity for representing his case before the first appellate authority. Therefore, I hereby set aside the impugned order of learned CIT(A) and restore the grounds of appeal before learned CIT(A) to decide it afresh on merit after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee would not seek any adjournment without any reasonable case. Grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 19.12.2023. Sd/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI