DDIT, New Delhi V. Smt. Sukanya Shankar, New Delhi

ITA 3305/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9730 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 13-01-2010
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 22-07-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MUKESH VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: DEEP AK TEHLAN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN AND SHRI K.D. RANJAN ITA NO. 3305(DEL)2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, SMT . SUKANYA SHANKAR, CIR. 2(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, V. NEAR BRITISH SCHOOL, CHANAKYA PURI, N. DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI MUKESH VERMA, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI DEEP AK TEHLAN, CA ORDER PER A.D. JAIN, J.M. THIS IS DEPARTMENTS APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 TAKING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW BY ADMITTING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WITHOUT ALL OWING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PRESENT HIS SIDE OF THE CASE. THUS PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY HAVE BEEN DENIED. THIS IS ALSO NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE MANDATORY REQUIREMENT UNDER RULE 46A(3) OF INCOME TAX RULES, 1962. 2. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) BE THEREFORE SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR VERIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE CIT(A). ITA 3305(DEL)09 2 2 . A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER SHOWS THAT THE ADDI TIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WAS IND EED ENTERTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND RELIEF WAS ALLOWED ON THE BASIS THEREON. THIS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE AO, THEREBY DEPRIVING THE AO AN OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT THE SAME. THIS ACT ION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS CLEARLY VIOLATIVE TO THE NATURAL PRINCIPLE OF AUDI ALTEREM PARTEM . THAT BEING SO, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, IT WOULD BE AP PROPRIATE TO REMIT THIS MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO, TO BE DECIDED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW ON CONSIDERING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE AS SESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE IS FREE TO SUPPORT SUCH EVID ENCE. THE ASSESSEE, NO DOUBT, SHALL CO-OPERATE WITH THE AO. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS T REATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13.01.2010. SD/- SD/- (K.D. RANJAN) (A.D. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 13.01.2010 *RM ITA 3305(DEL)09 3 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CIR. 2(2), INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, NEWDELHI. 2.SMT. SUKANYA SHANKAR, NEAR BRITISH SCHOOL, CHANAKYA PURI, N. DELHI. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR