SVM Impex Pvt Ltd, Lucknow V. ITO WARD - 22(4), New Delhi

ITA 503/DEL/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2044 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VANSIKA TANEJA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause; Set aside
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI SMC-2 BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING ) BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.503/DEL/2020 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SVM IMPEX PVT.LTD., 401, 4 TH FLOOR, SHALIMAR SQUARE, BN ROAD, LALBAGH, LUCKNOW-226001(UTTAR PRADESH) PAN-AAGCS3809J VS ITO, WARD-22(4), NEW DELHI. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY MS. VANSIKA TANEJA, ADV. RESPONDENT BY SH. R.K.GUPTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 22.06.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30 .06.2021 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2013-14 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-XXV, N EW DELHI DATED 13.12.2019. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TA (APPEALS) [CIT(A)] PASSED U/S 250(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HERE IN AFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) DATED 13.12.2019 IS BAD I N LAW AND ON FACTS. 1.1. THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER AS AN EX-PARTE ORDER AND HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL ON THE GROUND OF NON-PROSE CUTION OF APPEAL BY THE APPELLANT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE JUDGEMENT OF HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT(CENTRAL) NAGPUR VS. PREMKUMAR ARJUNDAS LUTHRA (HUF), [2016] 69 TAXMANN.COM 407(BOMBAY), WHEREBY IT HAS B EEN HELD THAT LAW DOES NOT EMPOWER CIT(A) TO DISMISS THE APPEAL ON ACCOUNT OF NON-PROSECUTION. 2. THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (A) U/S 250 OF THE ACT IS PERVERSE TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAW AND TO THE FA CTS OF THE CASE, BECAUSE OF NOT FOLLOWING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ITA NO.532/DEL/2020 2 | P A GE WHICH STATES THAT ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEAL S) DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL SHALL BE IN WRITING AND SHALL STATE THE POIN TS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE DECISION. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LD. CIT(A) H AS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 30,70,914/- CLAIMED UNDER THE HEAD OF INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY ON THE ACCOUNT OF NOTION AL RENT. 3.1. THAT THE LD.AO HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FA CT THAT THE APPELLANT WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF REAL ESTATE AND IT W AS NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF RENTING OUT ITS FLATS. 3.2. THAT THE LD.AO HAS ERRED IN MAKING THE ADDITIO N OF NOTIONAL RENT ON FLATS UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY WHICH IS HELD AS A STOCK IN TRADE. 4. THAT THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE SUBMITTED THAT NO EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION WAS MADE BEFORE LD.CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT ITS CASE. THEREFORE , IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LD.CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 3. LD. DR OPPOSED THESE SUBMISSIONS AND SUPPORTED T HE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A). HE SUBMITTED THAT VARIOUS OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. 4. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THRO UGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS SEEN FROM THE ORDER THA T THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY. HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST O F PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE LAST OPPORTUNITY OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, I HE REBY SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ITA NO.532/DEL/2020 3 | P A GE ORDER AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY DIRECTED NOT TO SEEK ANY ADJOURN MENT WITHOUT ANY REASONABLE CAUSE OF ANY MEDICAL EMERGENCY ETC. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED ON CONCLUSION OF VIR TUAL HEARING IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES ON 30 TH JUNE, 2021. SD/- (KUL BHARAT) JUDICIAL MEMBER * AMIT KUMAR * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI