ARISON ASSOCIATES PVT LTD, NEW DELHI V. ITO WARD - 3(2), New Delhi

ITA 4/DEL/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5589 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-03-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 143(3); 143(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 04/Del/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Arison Associates Pvt. Ltd., vs. Income-tax Officer, L-30, Basement, Kailash Colony, Ward 3(2), New Delhi. Near DJB Tubewell, New Delhi PAN : AAFCA5898L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by: Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 30.03.2022 Date of order : 30.03.2022 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10.10.2019 passed by the learned CIT(A)-I, New Delhi for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issue of notice through RPAD by the Tribunal. It was seen that no one was appearing from the side of the assessee and the registered letters were returned back with the postal remark that there is no such person in the given address. The assessee has also not taken any step to intimate any change of address. I, therefore, deem it appropriate to decide the appeal on the basis of material available on record and after hearing the ld. DR. 2 3. The facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company and filed its return of income on 30.09.2016 declaring an income of Rs.38,880/-. The case was selected for complete scrutiny through CASS and notice u/s. 143(2) was duly issued and served on the assessee. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) on 22.11.2018 wherein he made addition of Rs.45,83,199/- on account of low income shown on investments/loans and advances. In appeal, ld. CIT(A) vide ex parte order passed by him, dismissed the appeal. 4. I have heard the ld. DR and perused the record. I find that the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings has not explained the investments/loans and advances to the tune of Rs.7,97,99,134/-, for which the Assessing Officer estimated the income of the assessee by applying the profit rate of 7% and determined such income at Rs.55,85,939/- and after deducting the interest income of Rs.10,02,740/- shown by the assessee, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.45,83,199/-, which was upheld by the ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. It is observed from the assessment order that despite 11 opportunities granted by the Assessing Officer, there was hardly any compliance from the side of the assessee since the assessee was seeking adjournments on one pretext or the other or there was no compliance. Similarly, before the ld. 3 CIT(A) also, despite number of opportunities granted, there was no compliance except appearance of the counsel for the assessee only once without any document before the CIT(A). Since the assessee in the instant case has failed to substantiate the investments/loans and advances of Rs.7,97,99,134/-, the Assessing Officer has estimated the income @ 7% and after deducting the income already shown by the assessee, had made addition of Rs.45,83,199/-, which has been upheld by the ld. CIT(A). I do not find any infirmity in the ex parte order of the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is confirmed and the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30/03/2022. Sd/- (R.K. PANDA) Accountant Member Dated: 30/03/2022 ‘aks’