Mr. Vinod Puri, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 5216/DEL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 53192 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 03-11-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 24-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B R R KUMAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.5216/DEL/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 VINOD PURI, C/O M/S SATPAL & CO., 75, JANPATH, NEW DELHI. PAN : AHAPP4653K VS. ITO, WARD 31 (2), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SATISH AGGARWAL, CA REVENUE BY : SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, SR.DR ORDER PER I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (A) DATED 20 TH SEPTEMBER, 2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND HAS DECLARED INCOME FROM TRADING OF KASHMIRI SHAWLS, FERANS AND OTHER KASHMIRI CL OTHES. HE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME AT ` 2,63,695/-. THE ASSESSING OFFI CER NOTICED THAT THERE WERE SUNDRY CREDITORS OF ` 1,06,62,882/-. THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN AND AFTER MAKING INQUIRIES THE A SSESSING OFFICER ADDED A SUM OF ` 84,20,486/- TO THE RETURNED INCOME AND HAS ASSESSED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT ` 86,84,180/-. AN APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE CIT (A). ON VARIOUS DATES THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENTS AND ON THE LAST ADJOURNED DATE I.E., ON 30 TH SEPTEMBER, ITA NO.5216/DEL/2010 2 2010, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR, THEREFORE, LEARNED C IT (A) HAS PASSED AN EX PARTE ORDER WHEREBY HE HAS SUSTAINED THE PA RT ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF ` 44,10,499/- BY GIVING THE RELIEF OF ` 40,18,489/- IN RESPECT OF THREE PARTIES WHOSE PAN WERE SUBMITTED BY TH E ASSESSEE. 3. IN GROUND NO.1, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) ON THE GROUND THAT IT HAS BEEN PASSED WITHOUT AFFO RDING A REASONABLE AND MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. IN OTHER GROUNDS, THE ASSESSEE HAS AGITATED THE ADDITIONS SUSTAINED B Y LEARNED CIT (A). 4. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AR THAT CIT (A) D ID NOT PROVIDE EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. HE SUB MITTED THAT MANY OF THE CONFIRMATIONS HAVE NOW BEEN OBTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED AR WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN THAT WHETHER THESE CONFIRMATIONS ARE OBTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER THE ORD ER OF THE CIT (A). IT WAS SUBMITTED BY HIM: YES, THE CONFIRMATIONS ARE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A). 5. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION, AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IT IS A FIT CASE WHERE THE MA TTER CAN BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) WITH A DIRECTION TO PROVIDE THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF REPRESENTING HIS CASE AND, THEREAFTER, RE-ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE REGARDING ADDITIO NS RAISED BEFORE HIM. WE, THEREFORE, RESTORE THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE PR ESENT APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER G IVING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING IN THE MANNER AFOR ESAID. SINCE WE HAVE RESTORED THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF CIT (A), WE DO NOT EXPRESS ANY OPINION ON THE MERITS WHICH WILL BE RE-ADJUDICATED B Y THE LEARNED CIT (A). ITA NO.5216/DEL/2010 3 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TRE ATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.11.20 11. SD/- SD/- [K.G. BANSAL] [I.P. BANSAL] ACCOUNTANT BANSAL JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED, 18.11.2011. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES