M/s. Ravina & Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 4482/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6986 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 26-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUSAM D GEORGE
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F, NEW DELHI BEFORE SRI G.D. AGARWAL, HONBLE V.P. AND SRI C.M. GARG, JM ITA NO. 4482/DEL./2013 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2008-09 RAVINA & ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. 201, TOLSTOY HOUSE TOLSTOY MARG NEW DELHI VS ADDL. CIT CIRCLE-15(1) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAACR4696N ASSESSEE BY : SH. SALIL AGGARWAL, ADV. SH. RAVI PRATAP NALL, AD V. REVENUE BY : MS. SUSAM D. GEORGE, SR. D R DATE OF HEARING : 24.05.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.07.2016 ORDER PER C.M.GARG, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FILED AGAISNT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-XVIII, NEW DELHI DATED 29/09/2011 PASSED IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 80/2010-11 FOR AY 2008-09. APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY : ITA NO . 4482/DEL/2013 RAVINA & ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE SAID APPLICA TION INTER ALIA ASSESSMENT ORDER AND IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(A). FROM THE FACTS NOTED FROM THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW IT I S CLEAR THAT THE AO MADE ADDITION ON NOTIONAL BASIS OF RS. 9,01,053/- R EPRESENTING INTEREST ALLEGEDLY ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE BANK BALAN CE LYING IN AN ACCOUNT WITH NATWEST BANK AN ACCOUNT OF LETTER OF R OGATORY ISSUED BY CBI JUDGE. WE ARE ALSO SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED EVIDENCE IN THE SHAPE OF CONFIRMATION DATED 8.6.201 3 FROM NATWEST BANK, LONDON FAVOURING ITS CASE SHOWING THAT NO INT EREST WAS CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PERIOD UNDE R CONSIDERATION. 3. THE LD. DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT THIS FACT TH AT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED ON 26.7.2013 AFTER DELAY OF 600 DAYS DUE TO T HIS BONAFIDE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD BE ABLE TO COLLECT EVIDENCE FAVOURING HIS CASE ONLY ON 8.6.2013. 4. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE ARE SATISIFIED THAT I N ABSENCE OF REQUIRED RELEVANT EVIDENCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FILE APPEA L ON OR BEFORE 3.12.2011 WITHIN PRESCRIBED PERIOD DUE TO REASONS B EYOND HIS CONTROL HENCE, DELAY IN FILING APPEAL IS CONDONED AND APPEA L IS ADMITTED FOR HEARING ON MERITS. ITA NO . 4482/DEL/2013 RAVINA & ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. 3 APPLICATION UNDER RULE 29 OF INCOME-TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES 1963 FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE :- 5. WE HAVE HEARD ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AN D CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED ON THE RECORD BY WAY OF PRESENT APPLICATION THE ASSESSEE SEEKS TO PLACE ON RECORD CONFIRMATION DATE D 8.6.2013 ISSUED BY NETWEST BANK, LONDON CONFIRMING THE FACT THAT NO INTEREST WAS CREDITED TO THE BANK A/C. OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE R ELEVANT PERIOD. THE LD. DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT THIS FACT THAT THIS SAI D CONFIRMATION HAS NOT AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE CLEARING ASSESSMENT AND FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS HENCE, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUFFICIENT REAS ON WHICH PREVENTED IT TO SUBMIT THE SAME BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OP INION THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE DESERVES TO BE ADMITTED AND THU S NO ADMIT THE SAME. CONSEQUENTLY, THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER RULE 29 OF IT(AT) RULES, 1963 IS ALLOWED. 6. SINCE BY THE EARLIER PART OF THIS ORDER, WE H AVE ADMITTED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WHICH WAS NOT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO & CI T(A), HENCE, TO MEET ENDS OF THE JUSTICE THE CASE IS RESTORED TO TH E FILE OF THE AO FOR LIMITED PURPOSES TO READJUDICATE THE ISSUE OF NOTIO NAL INTEREST ON THE BALANCE OF ASSESSEE WHICH NETWEST BANK WITH A DIREC TION THAT HE SHALL DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING DUE OPPORTU NITY OF HEARING ITA NO . 4482/DEL/2013 RAVINA & ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. 4 FOR THE ASSESSEE AND WITHOUT BEING PREJUDICED FROM THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT AND IMPUGNED ORDER. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR SATISTICAL PURPSOES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 01/07/2016. SD/- SD/- ( G.D.AGARWAL ) (C.M.GARG) VICE PRESIDENT J UDICIAL MEMBER DATED:01/ 07/2016 *BINITA* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) ITA NO . 4482/DEL/2013 RAVINA & ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. 5 DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON (HAND WRITTEN) 1 3.06.2016 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 13.06.2016 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.