Abhishek Agarwal, Amroha V. ITO- 1(4), Amroha

ITA 3873/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3505 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K C SINGHAL
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings; Set aside
• Section: 142(1); 148

Judgement Text

ABHISHEK AGARWAL VS. ITO/ I.T.A.NO.3873/DEL/2019/A. Y.2014-15 PAGE 1 OF 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER . . /. I.T.A NO.3873/DEL/2019 / ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 SHRI ABHISHEK AGARWAL S/O SH. SHUBHASH CHANDRA AGARWAL, PROP. M/S RAMESHWAR PRASAD SUBHASH CHANDRA, BAZAR GHER MUNAF, AMROHA-24221 VS. ITO WARD 1(4) AMROHA. APPELLANT / RESPONDENT PAN NO. ALEPA3786A /ASSESSEE BY SHRI K.C. SINGHAL, ADVOCATE /REVENUE BY SHRI PRADEEP SINGH GAUTAM, SR. DR /O R D E R 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IM PUGNED ORDER DATED 30.12.2016 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS)-MORADABAD IN RELATION TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2. ASSESSEE HAS RAISED 3 GROUNDS OF APPEAL WHICH HE HAS MENTIONED IN THE COLUMN 10 FORM NO. 36 FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIEN CE I.E. REPRODUCED AS UNDER: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, CIT(A) WAS NOT JUST IFIED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL EX-PARTE IN LIMINI WITHOUT SE RVING THE ABHISHEK AGARWAL VS. ITO/ I.T.A.NO.3873/DEL/2019/A. Y.2014-15 PAGE 2 OF 4 NOTICE ON THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT IS SIMPLY A VICTIM ON ACCOUNT OF LAPS ON THE PART OF HIS COUNSEL. 2. THAT ORDER OF CIT(A) IS ILLEGAL SINCE ORDER IS NOT PASSED ON MERITS OF THE CASE. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO RAISE ANY OTHER GROUND WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE ALSO FILED ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL WHICH IS ALSO REPRODUCE D AS UNDER: THE INITIATION OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 148 OF THE ACT WAS ILLEGAL BEING VOID AB INITIO INASMUCH AS NO TICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED DURING THE PENDENCY OF ORIGIN AL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS INITIATED U/S 142(1) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 4. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT LD. FIR ST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSES SEE EX PARTE WITHOUT GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING WHICH IS CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF LAW. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHO RITY CANT DISMISS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROSECUTION. HE HAS TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERIT. THEREFORE, THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS ILLEGAL AND LIABLE TO BE CANCELLED. BUT HE REQUESTED THAT ADDITIONAL GRO UND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE MAY BE ADMITTED AND ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE MAIN GROUND OF APPEAL AS WELL AS IN THE ADDITIONAL GROUND RAISED B Y THE ASSESSEE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY TO D ECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AS PER LAW, AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSE E. ABHISHEK AGARWAL VS. ITO/ I.T.A.NO.3873/DEL/2019/A. Y.2014-15 PAGE 3 OF 4 5. LD. SR. DR HAS NOT RAISED ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION ON THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE AND RELIED UPON THE ORDERS PASSED BY T HE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 6. I HAVE HEARD THE BOTH PARTIES AND HAVE GONE THRO UGH THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ESPECIALLY THE IM PUGNED ORDER ALONG WITH THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE SPECIALLY T HE ADDITIONAL GROUND AND I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ISSUE INVO LVED IN THE ADDITIONAL GROUND IS LEGAL. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN THE CASE OF N ATIONAL THERMAL POWER COMPANY LIMITED VS. CIT 229 ITR 383 (SC). TH E ADDITIONAL GROUND IS ADMITTED. 7. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE PRESENT CASE AND THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS DISMISSED THE APP EAL FOR NON- PROSECUTION WHICH IS NOT AS PER THE LAW AS WELL AS WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I AM SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE M ENTIONED IN THE GROUND OF APPEAL AS WELL IN THE ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEA L TO THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AS PE R LAW, AFTER GIVING FULL OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. ABHISHEK AGARWAL VS. ITO/ I.T.A.NO.3873/DEL/2019/A. Y.2014-15 PAGE 4 OF 4 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.12.201 9 SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 2 ND DECEMBER, 2019 *KAVITA ARORA, SR. PS COPY OF ORDER SENT TO- ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A) / ITAT (DR)/GUARD FILE OF ITAT. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT: DELHI BENCHES-DELHI DRAFT DICTATED ON 25.11.2019 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 26.11.2019 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. 02.12.2019 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 02.12.2019 ORDER PRONOUNCED AND UPLOADED 02.12.2019 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 02.12.2019 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.