M/s. Telesonic Systems (I) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3140/DEL/2017

AI Insights

The case involves Telesonic Systems (I) Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, New Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2008-09. The appeal was against the assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(2), New Delhi, which was based on the issuance of notices and the subsequent additions made under sections 68 and 144 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal noted the absence of the appellant's representation in most hearings and dismissed the appeal after considering the arguments of the Departmental Representative and the records presented.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 115664 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 7 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 10-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 144; 143(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3140/Del/2017, A.Y. 2008-09 Telesonic systems (I) Pvt. Ltd. C/o. V.K.Sehgal & Associates, CAs, 201, Harsh Bhavan, 64-65, Nehru Place New Delhi PAN : AABCT4775F Vs. ITO Ward-25(2), C.R.Building New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by None Revenue by Ms. Kajal Singh, SR DR Date of hearing: 11.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 11 .01.2023 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM: The appeal has been filed by the Assessee against order dated 07.03.2017 in Appeal No. 282/14-15 assessment year 2008-09 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (appeals)-9, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or in short ‘Ld. F.A.A.’) in regard to the appeal before it arising out of assessment order dated 06/12/2010 u/s 144 of the Income Tax ITA No. 3140./Del/2017 M/s. Telesonic Systems (I) P. Ltd. 2 Act, 1961 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-16(2), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Assessing Officer or ‘AO’). 2. Heard and perused the record. 3. As the case was called for hearing today non-appeared for the assessee. Record shows earlier only on one occasion out of six, appearances on behalf of the assessee was made. The notices stand issued for today and have been received by the report of refusal. The notices were issued as the address of V.K.Sehgal & Associates, CAs, whose address was mentioned in Form 36 as the address for service of notice. Accordingly, no further notice is justified and arguments of Ld. DR were heard who supported the orders of Ld. Tax Authorities Below. 4. Appreciating the matter on record, it can be observed that as far ground no. 1, 2 and 3 are concerned the same have been raised on the basis of issuance of notices by the Ld. AO on the wrong address. In this context, it can be appreciated that in the assessment order address A-53, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-2, New Delhi has been mentioned. The same is as per the PAN card details. Ld. AR has repeatedly issued notices u./s 143(2) and the notices dated 26.10.2010 was received back with the report that ‘there is no such company’, The appeal order shows that same address was mentioned by the assessee in Form no. 35. However, before this Tribunal no other address than the one given for service for notice upon the Chartered Accountant is mentioned. Thus, there appears to be no irregularity or illegality in the service of notices by Ld. AO requiring interference at this stage the grounds no. 1, 2 and 3 are accordingly decided against the assessee. 5. In regard to ground no. 4 and 5 it can be observed that the Ld. AO had passed order u/s 144 of the Act and before Ld. CIT(A) additional evidences under Rule 46A were filed on which remand report was sought from Ld. AO ITA No. 3140./Del/2017 M/s. Telesonic Systems (I) P. Ltd. 3 and based upon the same Ld. CIT(A) has benefited the assessee to the extent of reducing the addition made by Ld. AO on account of security premiums from Rs. 65,23,020/- to Rs. 31,23,000/- only and in the absence of lack of evidence and verification about genuineness of the creditors, confirmed the addition of Rs. 3,47,000/- by treating increase in share capital as unexplained cash credit u/s 68. No different opinion can be formed. The appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 11 th January, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (N.K.BILLAIYA) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 11 .01.2023 *Binita, SR.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI