Sh. Pradeep Gupta, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 3710/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7509 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 3
• Next Hearing Date: 13-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 23-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K K JAISWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC-3: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 3710/DEL/2014 A.Y. : 2009-10 SH. PRADEEP GUPTA, VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 0(3) C/O RAJIV SAXENA & CO. NEW DELHI (ADVOCATES & SOLICITORS) 318, POCKET-D, MAYUR VIHAR-II, DELHI 110 091 (PAN:ADFPG3512R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. RAJEEV SAXENA, ADV. DEPARTMENT BY : SH. KK JAISWAL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 13-06-2016 DATE OF ORDER : 13-06-2016 O R D E R PER H.S. SIDHU, JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.2.2014 OF THE LD. CIT(A)-XXII, NEW DEL HI RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. PAGE 2 OF 4 2. THE FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE NOT DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, THEREFORE, NO NEED TO REPEAT HERE FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSE E DRAW MY ATTENTION TOWARDS THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO AS WELL AS LD. CIT(A) AND STATED THAT BOTH THE AUTHORITIES HAVE NOT GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY FOR SUBSTANTIATING ITS CLAIM BY FILING TH E EVIDENCE BEFORE THEM. HE FURTHER DRAW MY ATTENTION TO THE PAPER BOOK FI LED BY HIM CONTAINING PAGES 1 TO 95 IN WHICH HE HAS ATTACHED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORIT Y UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 WHICH WAS REJECTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT CALLING FOR REMAND REPORT AND WITHOUT PROVID ING PROPER AND MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WHICH IS BEIN G FILED UNDER RULE 29 OF INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963. HE REQUESTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING ALL THE NECESSARY EVIDEN CES FOR SUBSTANTIATING ITS CLAIM BEFORE THE AO AND THE ISSU E IN DISPUTE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE AO FOR EXAMINING ALL THE EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WITH THE APPLICATION UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 AND TO DECIDE THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE AFRESH AS PER LAW, AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEEE. PAGE 3 OF 4 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR OPPOSED THE REQUEST OF T HE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE AND STATED THAT THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY MAY BE DIRECTED TO CALL FOR THE REMAND REPO RT FROM THE AO AND DECIDE THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE AFRESH AFTER GIVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE MAY BE SENT BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A). 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RELEV ANT RECORDS AVAILABLE WITH ME ESPECIALLY THE EVIDENCES FILED BE FORE THE LD. CIT(A) WITH THE APPLICATION UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TA X RULES, 1962. LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CERTIFIED THAT T HE DOCUMENTS FILED WITH THE PAPER BOOK CONTAINING PAGES 1 TO 95 ARE THE D OCUMENTS WHICH WERE FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 WHICH WERE REJECTED WITHOUT CALLING FOR REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO AND WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER AND MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. I AM OF THE CONSIDER ED VIEW THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER AND WOULD BE VERY MUCH RELEVANT TO DECIDE THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE INSTANT APPEAL, HENCE, IN THE INTEREST OF JU STICE, I ADMIT THE SAME, IN VIEW OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MANISH BUILDWELL 245 CTR 397 AND IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. TEXT PAGE 4 OF 4 HUNDRED INDIA (P) LTD. (2013) 351 ITR 57 (DELHI) AND THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO D ECIDE THE SAME AFRESH UNDER LAW, AFTER GIVING FULL OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13-06-2016. SD/- [H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 13/6/2016 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4.CIT (A) 5. DR , ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES