Shri Sidhdata Steel Tubes, Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 40/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3336 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S RANA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AN D SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.40/DEL./2017, A.Y. 2012-13 SH. SIDHDATA STEEL TUBES VS. ITO 307, 3 RD FLOOR, WARD-59(4) 79, SHYAM LAL ROAD, DARYAGANJ NEW DELHI DELHI PAN : AAOFS3736K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. RAJAT GUPTA, CA REVENUE BY : SHRI S.S.RANA, CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 27.11.2019 DATE OF ORDER : 29.11.2019 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE APPELLANT SH. SIDHDATA STEEL TUBES, DELHI (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ASSESSEE) BY FILI NG THE AFORESAID APPEAL, SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATE D 02/08/2016 PASSED BY LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-1 9, NEW DELHI QUA THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ON THE GROU NDS INTER ALIA THAT : ITA NO. 40/DEL./2017 2 1) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT (A) WAS INCORRECT AND UNJUSTIFIED IN: A) IN RESTRICTING THE ADDITION TO RS. 4,79,08,680/- I N PLACE OF ADDITION OF RS. 7,18,83,692/- INCORRECTLY AND UNJUS TIFIABLY MADE BY THE AO. B) IN RESTRICTING THE DISALLOWANCE TO 5% IN RESPECT O F THE REMAINING EXPENSES AS AGAINST ADDITION OF RS. 7,09, 661/- C) IN ENHANCING THE ADDITION OF RS. 61,53,954/- TO RS . 1,24,37,720/- WITHOUT ANY REASON OR BASIS AND EVIDE NCE AND ALSO WITHOUT OPPORTUNITY. D) IN RESTRICTING THE ADDITION OF RS. 12,69,185/- TO RS. 12,44,585/- WITHOUT ANY REASON OR BASIS AND EVIDENCE AND ALSO W ITHOUT OPPORTUNITY. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDICAT ION OF THE CONTROVERSY AT HAND ARE : THE ASSESSING OFFICER FR AMED ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT BY MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 7,18,83,792/- ON ACCOUNT OF FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE GENUINENESS OF THE SUNDRY CREDITORS, IDENTITY, CRE DITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE LOANS. AO ALSO MADE ADDITION OF RS. 7,09,661/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE TO THE TUNE OF 20% OF TH E TOTAL EXPENSES BEING UNVERIFIABLE / UNEXPLAINED. AO MADE ADDITION OF RS. 61,53,954/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST CALCULATED AT THE RATE OF 14.48% ON THE FREE LOAN AND ADVANCES LENT B Y THE ASSESSEE. AO ALSO MADE ADDITION OF RS. 12,69,185/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE BEING THE AMOUNT PAYABLE ON FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO PROVIDE DETAILS EXPLANATION. ITA NO. 40/DEL./2017 3 3. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD. CIT(A) BY WAY OF FILING THE APPEAL WHO HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL EX PAR TE ON FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO PUT IN APPEARANCE. FEELING AGGRIEVE D THE ASSESSEE HAS COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY WAY OF FILING TH E PRESENT APPEAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUM ENTS RELIED UPON AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E. 5. BARE PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) GOES TO PROVE THAT SERVICE OF THE ASSESSEE IS REPOR TEDLY EFFECTED THROUGH AFFIXTURE AS THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE W AS FOUND LOCKED BY THE INCOME TAX INSPECTOR. NO DOUBT, THE CIT(A) H AS DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERIT BUT WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW T HAT SINCE ALL THE ADDITIONS ON ACCOUNT OF SUNDRY CREDITORS AND ON ACC OUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES ARE REQUIRED TO BE DECIDED ONLY AFTER GOING THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS TO BE PRODUCED BY THE A SSESSEE WHO HAS NOT APPEARED EITHER BEFORE AO OR BEFORE LD. CIT (A), THE MATTER IS REQUIRED TO BE SET ASIDE TO THE AO TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ONCE FOR ALL BY PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE A SSESSEE. LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE MADE A CONTENTION THAT ONE OPPORTU NITY MAY BE GRANTED TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM. ITA NO. 40/DEL./2017 4 6. IN VIEW OF WHAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED ABOVE, WE SET ASIDE THE CASE BACK TO LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE AFRESH AFTER PROV IDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER , IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT ASSESSEE SHALL PUT IN APPEARANCE BEFORE LD. CIT(A) ON 8 TH APRIL, 2020 AND NO NOTICE IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED BY LD. CIT(A) TO PROCEED FURTHER. CONSEQUENTLY APPEAL FILED BY THE A SSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 29 TH NOVEMBER, 2019. SD/- SD/- (R.K.PANDA) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER D ATED : 29 TH /11/ 2019 *BR* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A)-19, NEW DELHI. 5. CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION 28.11.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 29.11.2019 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE ITA NO. 40/DEL./2017 5 SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER