Jagdish, Faridabad V. ITO, Ward- 1(3), Faridabad

ITA 3093/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5091 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RANO JAIN MS MANSI JAIN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside

Judgement Text

JAGDISH, FARIDABAD VS. ITO / I.T.A.NO.3093/DEL/2019 /A.Y.2008-09 PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER . . /. I.T.A NO.3093/DEL/2019 / ASSESSMENT YEAR:2008-09 JAGDISH S/O SH. MOHAN LAL, H.NO. 791, MAHBOB PATTI, VILLAGE KHERIKALAN, FARIDABAD, HARYANA. VS. ITO WARD 1(3) FARIDABAD. APPELLANT / RESPONDENT PAN NO. AIPPJ0629R /ASSESSEE BY MS. RANO JAIN, ADVOCATE MS. MANSI JAIN, CA /REVENUE BY SHRI PRADEEP SINGH GAUTAM, SR. DR /O R D E R 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IM PUGNED ORDER DATED 31.01.2019 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), FARIDABA D IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW: 1. THAT ON THE FACT ON CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER 143(3)/147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IS INVALID, ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION, VIO LATION OF PRINCIPAL OF NATURAL JUSTICES SUFFERS FROM NON APPLICATION OF MIND, PRESERVE AND VOID AB-INITIO. 2. THAT THE APPELLANT WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE AND SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT APPEARING BEFORE THE LD. C IT(A) AS THE REQUISITE INFORMATION COULD NOT BE PLACED BE FORE THE CIT(A) BY THE PREVIOUS COUNSEL ENGAGED BY THE APPELLANT AND ACCORDINGLY THE CIT(A) PASSED THE ORD ER EX-PARTE. JAGDISH, FARIDABAD VS. ITO / I.T.A.NO.3093/DEL/2019 /A.Y.2008-09 PAGE 2 OF 4 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 143(3)/147 REQUIRE ANNULLED AS HAVING COMPLETED ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT BY THE ASSESSEE ADIT(INV.) IIND, FARIDABAD WITHOUT SUPPORTIVE EVIDE NCE IGNORING THE FACTUAL VALUE OF THE RESIDENTIAL HOUSE . 4. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS IGNORING THE ACTUAL INVESTMENT IN RESID ENTIAL HOUSE RS. 95,67,800/-. 5. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE LD. AO NOT REJECTED ANY MISSTATE IN COMPUTATION OF CAPITAL GAIN WHICH WAS ON THE BASIS OF COLLABORATED TO THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. 6. THAT IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, AS NARRATED ABOVE, THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE AND SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT APPEARING FOR HEARINGS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IN THIS FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE THE ORDER MAY BE RESTORED TO TH E ASSESSING OFFICER FOR A PROPER APPRECIATION AND ADJUDICATION OF FACTS. THE APPELLANT GIVE HIS ORAL UNDERTAKING THAT IN THE EVENTUALITY THE ISSUES ARE RESTORED THE ASSESSEE WOULD FULLY PARTICIPATE IN TH E PROCEEDINGS. 7. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, TO AMEND, MODIFY, RESCIND, SUPPLEMENT OR ALTER ANY OF THE GRO UNDS STATED HEREINABOVE, EITHER BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THIS APPEAL. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE STATED THAT THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS DECIDED THE APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE EX- PARTE WITHOUT PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. SHE REQU ESTED THAT ISSUE JAGDISH, FARIDABAD VS. ITO / I.T.A.NO.3093/DEL/2019 /A.Y.2008-09 PAGE 3 OF 4 IN DISPUTE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE LD. FIRST APPELL ATE AUTHORITY TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AS PER LAW AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. LD. DR HAS NOT RAISED ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION ON T HE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND RELIED UPON THE OR DER PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE BOTH PARTIES AND GONE THROUGH T HE ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ESPECIALLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 31.01.2019 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-FARIDABAD AND I AM OF THE VIEW THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE AND WITHOUT GRANTING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO SUBS TANTIATE HIS CLAIM. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I AM SETTING ASIDE THE ISS UES IN DISPUTE TO THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AS PER LAW AFTER GIVING FULL OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AS WELL AS FOR P RODUCING THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE FOR SUBSTANTIATING THE CLAIM. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25.11.201 9 SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 25 TH NOVEMBER, 2019 *KAVITA ARORA, SR. PS JAGDISH, FARIDABAD VS. ITO / I.T.A.NO.3093/DEL/2019 /A.Y.2008-09 PAGE 4 OF 4 COPY OF ORDER SENT TO- ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A) / ITAT (DR)/GUARD FILE OF ITAT. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT: DELHI BENCHES-DELHI DRAFT DICTATED ON 21.11.2019 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 21.11.2019 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. 2 5 . 1 1 . 2 0 1 9 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 2 5 . 1 1 . 2 0 1 9 ORDER PRONOUNCED AND UPLOADED 2 5 . 1 1 . 2 0 1 9 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 2 5 . 1 1 . 2 0 1 9 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.