Sanjay Kumar Agarwal, New Delhi V. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-17, NEW DELHI

ITA 447/DEL/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8634 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 18-04-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.447/Del/2021 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sanjay Kumar Agarwal C-602, Swami Dayanand, Plot No.5, Sector-6, Dwarka, New Delhi-110075 PAN No.ADYPA3218K Vs ACIT Central Circle – 17 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant Sh. Sahil Aggarwal, CA Respondent Sh. M. Baranwal, CIT DR Date of hearing: 10/08/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 10/08/2022 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-3, New Delhi dated 17.02.2021 for A.Y.2013-14. 2. The grievance of the assessee read as under :- 2 3 3. We find that the assessee had filed appeals for A.Y. 2010-11 to 2015-16 and all the appeals had similar grounds of appeal. 4. We further find that this Tribunal has decided the appeals for A.Y.2010-11 to 2012-13 and A.Y.2014-15 to 2015-16 vide letter order dated 22.03.2022 in ITA No.444/Del/2021 to 446/del/2021 and 448/Del/2021 and 449/Del/2021. The present appeal pertains to A.Y.2013-14 but has mentioned elsewhere have identical grounds. This Tribunal in earlier years had decided the appeal as under :- “6. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the following additions made by the AO in gross disregard of principle of natural justice. 4 7. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in confirming the following additions made by the Assessing Officer wholly on assumptions and presumptions without identifying/evidencing any unaccounted transaction carried out by the assessee. Name Princip al repaid Interes t paid R.L.Meena 6,00,000 14,000 5. The ld. DR strongly supported the findings of the Assessing Officer. 6. We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. A perusal of the grounds itself shows that the appeal has been dismissed ex-parte. As can be seen, due to prevalent COVID restrictions, the assessee could not attend the appellate proceedings. Even the assessment order is framed ex parte u/s 144 of the I.T. Act. Name Princip al repaid Interes t paid R.L.Meena 6,00,000 14,000 5 7. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to restore this appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A). 8. The assessee is directed to represent his case with supporting documentary evidences and the ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after affording reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 9. In the result, all the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos. 444, 445, 446, 448 and 449/DEL/2021 are allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open court on 22.03.2022. 5. Respectfully following the decision of the coordinate Bench (supra) we direct accordingly. 6 6. Decision announced in the open court on 10.08.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER *NEHA, Sr. Private Secretary* Date:- .08.2022 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI