DLF Utilities Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, Circle- 7(1), New Delhi

ITA 3660/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1724 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHIMA NEB
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: B NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .NO.-3660/DEL/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2014-15) DLF UTILITIES LTD., 9 TH FLOOR, DLF CENTRE, SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI- 11 0001 (PAN: AAACN3199A) (APPELLANT) VS DCIT, CIRCLE 7(1), NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI R.S. SINGHVI, CA RESPONDENT BY MS. ASHIMA NEB, SR. DR. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU: JM THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 08.03.2018 OF THE LD. CIT(A)-3, NEW DEL HI RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - 1(I) THAT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN PASSING EXPARTE ORDER A ND DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT PRO PER OPPORTUNITY AND ADJUDICATION IN TERMS OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(4) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. (II) THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF PROPER AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY, THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS PASSED IN CONTRAVENTION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND NOT SUSTAINABLE UNDER THE LAW. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING DISALLOW ANCE 2 OF RS. 6,53,18,819/- U/S. 36(1)(III) BEING PROPORTIONATE CLAIM OF INTEREST ON ILLEGAL AND ARBI TRARY BASIS WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 3. THAT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 37,91,688/- U/S. 14A READ WITH RULE 8D IN TOTAL DISREGARD TO FACTS OF THE CASE AND PROVISIONS OF SE CTION 14A OF THE ACT. 4. THAT THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER, BEING WRONG O N FACTS AND BAD IN LAW, DESERVES TO BE QUASHED OR, ALTERNATIVELY, SET ASIDE. 5. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, A MEND, SUBSTITUTE, WITHDRAW AND / OR VARY ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT OR BEFORE THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE NO T DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, HENCE, THE SAME ARE N OT REPEATED HERE FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE, STATED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPE AL IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE ITAT IN ASSESSEES O WN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 VIDE ORDER DATED 28.6.2 018 PASSED IN ITA NO. 1998/DEL/2016 BY THE ITAT, A BE NCH, NEW DELHI. HE HAS ALSO FILED THE COPY OF THE SAID DEC ISION WHICH IS PLACED AT PAPER BOOK PAGE NO. 2-8 AND ALSO ATTACHE D THE COMPARABLE CHART SHOWING UTILIZATION OF FUNDS WHIC H IS AT PAGE NO. 1 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND REQUESTED THAT THE APPE AL FILED BY 3 THE ASSESSEE MAY BE ALLOWED BY FOLLOWING THE TRIBUN ALS ORDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS O F THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND STATED THAT ASSESSEE REMAIN ED NON- COOPERATIVE BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORI TY AND HAS NOT PRODUCED THE COPY OF THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL I N ASSESSEES OWN CASE. THEREFORE, HE REQUESTED THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE MAY BE DISMISSED. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE R ELEVANT RECORDS ESPECIALLY THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENU E AUTHORITIES ALONGWITH THE ORDER OF THE ITAT A BENCH, NEW DELH I IN ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 VIDE ORDER DATED 28.6.2018 PASSED IN ITA NO. 1998/DEL/20 16. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ASSESSEE REMAINED N ON- COOPERATIVE BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORI TY AND HAS ALSO NOT PRODUCED THE COPY OF THE AFORESAID ORDER O F THE ITAT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IT WOULD NOT BE PROPER T O COMMENT UPON THE MERITS OF THE CASE WHETHER THE ISSUE IS SQ UARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE OR NOT. THEREFORE, I N THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT FIT TO SET ASIDE THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME IN VI EW OF THE DECISION OF THE ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT 4 YEAR 2011-12 VIDE ORDER DATED 28.6.2018 PASSED IN I TA NO. 1998/DEL/2016. 5.1 KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE NON-APPEARANCE OF THE AS SESSEE BEFORE THE AO AND THE LD. CIT(A), WE DIRECT THE ASS ESSEE THROUGH HIS COUNSEL TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ON 14.01.2019 AT 10.00 AM FOR HEARING. THERE IS NO NEED TO ISSUE THE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE FOR 14.01.2019, BE CAUSE THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 26.11.2018. SD/- SD/- (O.P. KANT) (H.S. SIDHU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 26/11/2018 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI