Shri Harjeet Singh Saluja, New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4413/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 52692 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 15-09-2011
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SALIL MISHRA
• Keywords: Gift
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 4413/DEL/2009 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 4413/DEL/2009 A.Y. : 2001-02 SH. HARJEET SINGH SALUJA, D-35, RAJOURI GARDEN, NEW DELHI (PAN : AATPS7297Q) VS. DY. C.I.T., CIRCLE 26(1), NEW DELHI (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) ASSEESSEE BY : SH. ANIL SHARMA, ADV. DEPARTMENT BY : SH. SALIL MISHRA, SR. D.R. ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 11.9.2 009 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. 2. THE ISSUE RAISED IS THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE PENALTY OF ` 1 LA KH MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE IT ACT. 3. IN THIS CASE ADDITION OF ` 2,50,000/- WAS MADE U /S 68 OF THE IT ACT HOLDING THAT THE GIFT OF ` 2,50,000/- RECEIVED BY T HE ASSESSEE WAS BOGUS. PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WAS ALSO INITIATED IN THIS REGARD AND PENALTY OF ` 1 LAKH WAS IMPOSED. 4. LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) CONFIRME D THE PENALTY. ITA NO. 4413/DEL/2009 2 5. AGAINST THIS ORDER THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEF ORE US. 6. AT THE OUTSET, LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE PLEAD ED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AS WE LL AS ORDER OF THE PENALTY ARE EXPARTE ORDERS AND ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN AFFORDED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT HIS CASE. HENC E, HE PLEADED THAT AN OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE, BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CANVASS HIS CASE. 6.1 LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT HAVE ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION TO THIS PROPOSITION. 7. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE REMIT THIS ISSUE TO THE FILES OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONSIDER THE ISS UE AFRESH, AFTER AFFORDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15/9/2011 UPO N CONCLUSION OF HEARING. [ [[ [I.P. BANSAL I.P. BANSAL I.P. BANSAL I.P. BANSAL] ]] ] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE 15/9/2011 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES ITA NO. 4413/DEL/2009 3