ITO Ward-1(2), V. Vipin Kumar,

ITA 3744/DEL/2003

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9702 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 6 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-01-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 25-01-2010
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 21-07-2003
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BK GUPTA
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

ITA NO.3744/DEL/03 A.Y. 1998-99 1 IN THE INCOMETAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.L. SETHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3744/DEL/2003 A.Y. : 1998-99 INCOME TAX OFFICER, VS. M/S SHRI BIPIN KUMAR M AKKAR PROP., WARD-1(2), GHAZIABAD JAMUNA PROCESSERS, 15/11, SITE-IV, SHAIBABAD, GHAZIABAD [PAN/GIR NO. V-716] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI B.K. GUPTA, SR. DR O R D E R PER SHAMIM YAHYA : AM THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) DATED 31.03.2003/1.4.2003 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99. 2. THE ISSUE RAISED IS THAT LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN AL LOWING THE RELIEF OF RS. 10,49,100/- BEING ASSESSEES COMPANY INCOME FRO M UNEXPLAINED CAPITAL AND LOAN. IT HAS FURTHER BEEN URGED THAT LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN RELYING UPON THE VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS / EVIDENCES IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 46A OF THE I.T. RULES. 3. IN THIS CASE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE IT ACT. ASSESSEE HAD NOT COOPERATED DURING THE COURSE OF AS SESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. AOS REQUIREMENT REGARDING DETAILS SPECIFICALLY WI TH RESPECT TO DEPOSITS OF ITA NO.3744/DEL/03 A.Y. 1998-99 2 ABOVE RS. 1 LAC ALONGWITH PROOF OF THEIR CREDITWOR THINESS WAS NOT COMPLIED WITH. AO PROCEEDED TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING ADDITION S:- I) UNEXPLAINED CAPITAL : RS. 7,83,600/- II) UNSECURED LOANS : RS. 1,00,000/- III) UNEXPLAINED DEPOSITS : RS. 1,25,000/- IV) DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST : RS. 40,500/- ============ TOTAL : RS. 10,49,100/- ============ 4. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), ASSESSEE SUBMITTED WRITT EN REPLY WHICH INCLUDED SEVERAL EVIDENCES WHICH WERE NOT PRODUCED BEFORE TH E AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. SOME FRESH EVIDENCES WERE A LSO FURNISHED DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THE SAME WERE REM ANDED BY THE CIT(A) TO THE AO. IN THE REMAND REPORT A.O. INTER-ALIA SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PRODUCE THE CREDITORS FOR EXAMINATION. L D. CIT(A) ALSO NOTED THAT AO HAS NOT CONSIDERED CERTAIN EVIDENCES AND DETAILS F URNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. LD. C IT(A) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT AFTER GOING THROUGH THE CASE RECORDS, IT EMERGED TH AT WHILE FURNISHING THE REMAND REPORT AO HAD NOT FOLLOWED THE CONCERNED ASS ESSMENT RECORD OF THE CASE. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION, LD. CIT(A) PROCEEDED TO GRANT THE RELIEF OF RS. 10,49,100/- TO THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF THE ABOVE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS. 5. AGAINST THIS ORDER THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFO RE US. 6. DESPITE SERVICE OF THE NOTICE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. WE FIND THAT THE REVENUE HAS URGED THAT LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN REL YING THE SUBMISSIONS AND EVIDENCES IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE PROVISIONS OF RUL E 46A. WE FIND IN THIS CASE THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, ASSESSEE HAD NOT COO PERATED DURING THE ITA NO.3744/DEL/03 A.Y. 1998-99 3 ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WHICH WERE COMPLETED UNDER S ECTION 144 OF THE IT ACT. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED VARIOUS ADDITIONAL EVIDE NCES BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THOUGH IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS ALSO AO OBSERVED T HAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT MADE CERTAIN COMPLIANCES, LD. CIT(A) PROCEEDED TO E XAMINE THE SUBMISSION AND GRANTED THE RELIEF. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINIO N, INTEREST OF JUSTICE WILL BE SERVED, IF THE SAID ISSUE IS REMITTED TO THE FILES OF THE AO, TO ENABLE HIM TO GO THROUGH THE FRESH SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE BEFOR E THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, THE ISSUE IS REMITTED TO THE FILES OF THE AO. NEEDLESS TO ADD THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY O F BEING HEARD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS ALLOWED F OR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25/01/2010. SD/- SD/- [C.L. SETHI) [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 25/01/ 2010 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES