Vishal Girdhar, Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3334/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 91065 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 02-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 27-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P DAM KANUNJHA
• Assessee Lawyers: V SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, AM AND SH. GEORGE GEORGE K, JM ITA NO. 3334/DEL/2013 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2008-09 VISHAL GIRDHAR 5256/57, KOLHAPUR ROAD, NEAR CHANDRAWAL ROAD DELHI VS ITO WARD- 20(1) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. ABSPV6557A ASSESSEE BY : SH. V.SINGH, CA REVENUE BY : SH. P. DAM KANUNJH A, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 02.06.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.06.2015 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.01.2013 OF LD. CIT(A)-XXII, NEW DELHI. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS AP PEAL :- 01. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XXII HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DISPOSING OFF THE APPEAL EXPARTE WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT WHICH IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 02. THAT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE GROUND NO. 1 REGARDING NOT AFFORDING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX (APPEALS)-XXII HAS ERRED IN LAW IN SUSTAINING A N ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT OF RS. ITA NO. 3334/DEL/2013 2 13,39,715/- TOWARDS CASH DEPOSITED BY THE APPELLANT IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT IGNORING THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 03. THAT THE APPELLANT LEAVES TO CRAVE, ADD, ALTER AND / OR DELETE ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT LATE R STAGE IF NECESSARY. 3. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET STATED THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS NOT DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERIT AND DISMISSED THE SAME EXPARTE IN LIMINE. 4. IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. DR SUPPORTE D THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COOPERATE AND NEVER APPEARED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) SO THERE WAS NO OPTION EXCEPT TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FO R NON- PROSECUTION. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS BOTH THE P ARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON TH E RECORD, IN THE PRESENT CASE IT IS NOTICED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, EXPARTE, IN LIMINE AND DID NOT ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ON MER IT. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBODY SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AS PER THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PERTAM. WE THEREFORE, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO REMAND THIS CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) TO BE DECIDED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER P ROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO AS SESSEE. WE ITA NO. 3334/DEL/2013 3 ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO COOPERATE AND NOT TO SE EK UNWARRANTED OR UNDUE ADJOURNMENTS. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 04/06/2015) SD/- SD/- (GEORGE GEORGE K) (N. K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 04 /06/2015 *BINITA* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITA NO. 3334/DEL/2013 4 DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 2/06/2015 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.