Modern Holdiengs P.Ltd, Delhi V. ITO, Ward-17(1), New Delhi

ITA 5286/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3807 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 16-08-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHISH GOEL; UMANG LUTHRA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 13

Judgement Text

PAGE | 1 , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E, NEW DELHI , . . , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM & SHRI R.K. PAN DA, AM / ITA NO. 5927/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 MUNI RAM VERMA, 1245, 2 ND FLOOR, KUCHA MAHAJANI .......... /APPELLANT CHANDANI CHOWK, NEW DELHI-110006 PAN-ACBPV8621R VS DCIT, WARD-5(1), NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : SH. ASHISH GOEL, CA & MS. UMANG LUTHRA, ADV !'# / RESPONDENT BY : MS. RAKHI VIMAL, 2SR. DR DELHI BENCH B, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 6008/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15 DEEPAK GUPTA, D-9, SECTOR-55, NOIDA .......... /APPELLANT PAN-AKHPG1593K VS ACIT, CIRCLE-1, NOIDA . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. PRADEEP SINGH GAUTAM, SR. DR PAGE | 2 DELHI BENCH E, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5975/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 MORGAN ASIA LTD., J/4/57, KHIRKI EXTENSION, .......... /APPELLANT MALVIYA NAGAR, NEW DELHI PAN-AAACM8554E VS ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1) NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : SH. MOHIT JAIN, CA !'# / RESPONDENT BY : MS. RAKHI VIMAL, SR. DR DELHI BENCH D, NEW DELHI / ITA NO.5924/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2014-15 KRISHNA RAJ EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY KANSEN MARG, CHUNA MANDI, .......... /APPELLANT BUDAUN, U.P.-243601 PAN-AAAAK5285G VS ACIT (EXEMPTION) LUCKNOW . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. PRADEEP SINGH GAUTAM, SR. DR DELHI BENCH A, NEW DELHI / ITA NO.5664/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 ARADHANA TEWARI, 6, SOUTHERN AVENUE, .......... /APPELLANT MAHARANI BAGH, NEW DELHI PAN-ADCPT9875B PAGE | 3 VS DCIT, CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : SH. RAJINDER HANDA, CA !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. PRADEEP SINGH GAUTAM, SR. DR DELHI BENCH A, NEW DELHI / ITA NO.5455/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 SH. BHAGIRATH PRASAD GUPTA, 4RPS, DDA MARKET, KHANPUR, .......... /APPELLANT NEW DELHI-110062 PAN-AAGPG8971L VS ACIT, CIRCLE-31(1), NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : SH. ASHISH GOEL, CA & MS. UMANG LUTHRA, ADV !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. PRADEEP SINGH GAUTAM, SR. DR DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI / ITA NO.5383/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S GREENLINE BUILDERS LTD., 106, PALCO HOUSE, T-10, MAIN .......... /APPELLANT PAN-AACCG6844K VS ITO, WARD-10(3), NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. S.N. MEENA, SR. DR PAGE | 4 DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI / ITA NO.5287/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 M/S VIRAAT CONSULTANT & TRADERS (P) LTD., .......... /APPELLANT VIRAAT 1, C-56/35 SECTOR 62, NOIDA PAN-AABCV0602M VS JCIT, RANGE-2 NEW DELHI .. / RESPONDENT !'# /APPELLANT BY : SH. R.P. MALL, ADV !'# /RESPONDENT BY : SH. S.N. MEENA, SR. DR DELHI BENCH G, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5282/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S VIRAAT CONSULTANT & TRADERS (P) LTD., .......... /APPELLANT VIRAAT 1, C-56/35 SECTOR 62, NOIDA PAN-AABCV0602M VS JCIT, RANGE-2, . / RESPONDENT NOIDA !'# / APPELLANT BY : SH. R.P. MALL, ADV !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. S.N. MEENA, SR. DR DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5340/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S GLOSTER METALS & ALLOYS PVT LTD. A-19/B-1, EXTENSION, MOHAN .......... /APPELLANT COOPERATIVE INDL., MATHURA ROAD, BADARPUR, NEW DELHI PAN-AABCV0602M PAGE | 5 VS ITO WARD-10(2), . / RESPONDENT NEW DELHI DELHI BENCH SMC, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5362/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 ASTRAL PROPERTIES & CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD., .......... /APPELLANT 20-A, GREEN MEADOWS FARM, SATBARI, MEHRAULI, NEW DELHI PAN-AAACA8109P VS ITO WARD-3(3), . / RESPONDENT NEW DELHI !'# / APPELLANT BY : SH. ARUN KISHRE, CA !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. S.N. MEENA, SR. DR DELHI BENCH D, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5348/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 KUSHARG JINDAL, 25, VAISHALI, 3 RD FLOOR, .......... /APPELLANT PITAMPURA, DELHI, NEW DELHI PAN-AEBPJ5647M VS ACIT, CIRCLE-25(1) NOW CIRCLE-40(1), NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. PRADEEP SINGH GAUTAM, SR. DR PAGE | 6 DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5199/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 INTELLECASH MICROFINANCE NETWORK CO. PVT. LTD., .......... /APPELLANT 13A, TECHNPLEX-II, IT PARK, 6 TH FLOOR, OFF VEER SAVARKAR FLYOVER, GOREGAON (WEST), MUMBAI PAN-AABCC9428J VS DCIT, CIRCLE-12(2) NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : SH. PUNEET THUKRAL, CA !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. S.N. MEENA, SR. DR DELHI BENCH A, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5195/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S AVID APPAREL INDUSTRIES J-31, JASOLA HEIGHTS, SECTOR-9A, .......... /APPELLANT JASOLA, NEW DELHI-110025 PAN-AAAFW0362P VS ACIT, CIRCLE-63(1), NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. PRADEEP SINGH GAUTAM, SR. DR DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5186/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 GREEN TOURIST SERVICES PVT. LTD., SHOP NO. 9, SECTOR-2 MARKET, .......... /APPELLANT R.K. PURAM, NEW DELHI, DELHI PAN-AAACG2348C PAGE | 7 VS ACIT, CIRCLE-10(2) NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. S.N. MEENA, SR. DR DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5016/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 G.B. MORRISON TRAVELS P. LTD., 18, COMMUNITY CENTRE, KAILASH .......... /APPELLANT COLONY EXTN. ZAMRUDPUR, NEW DELHI PAN-AAACG0264D VS DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1) NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. S.N. MEENA, SR. DR DELHI BENCH E, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5286/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 MODERN HOLDINGS P. LTD., C-1/2, FLAT NO. 10, MODEL TOWN .......... /APPELLANT DELHI PAN-AAACM1203G VS ITO, CIRCLE-17(1), NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : MS. RAKHI VIMAL, SR. DR PAGE | 8 DELHI BENCH F, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5248/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 PREHLAD TYAGI, VILLAGE & P.O. MAKANPUR, INDRAPURAM, GHAZIABAD .......... /APPELLANT PAN-ACGPT1275N VS ITO, WARD-2(1) GHAZIABAD . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. SARAS KUMAR, SR. DR DELHI BENCH E, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5013/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 M/S MONOCHEM GRAPHICS P. LTD., A-25, MAYAPURI INDUSTRIAL AREA, .......... /APPELLANT PHASE-I, NEW DELHI PAN-AAACM7793F VS DCIT, CIRCLE-17(1), NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : MS. RAKHI VIMAL, SR. DR DELHI BENCH G, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5687/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 SGS TRADERS (P) LTD., A-301, A6, AURANGZEB ROAD, .......... /APPELLANT NEW DELHI PAN-AAHCS8977J PAGE | 9 VS ITO, WARD-8(1), NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. SARAS KUMAR, SR. DR DELHI BENCH G, NEW DELHI / ITA NO. 5686/DEL/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 [PENALTY U/S 271(1)(C)] SGS TRADERS (P) LTD., A-301, A6, AURANGZEB ROAD, .......... /APPELLANT NEW DELHI PAN-AAHCS8977J VS ITO, WARD-8(1), NEW DELHI . / RESPONDENT !'# / APPELLANT BY : NONE !'# / RESPONDENT BY : SH. SARAS KUMAR, SR. DR $!%&' / DATE OF HEARING : 26.11.2019 () !%&' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29.11.2019 / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: THE PRESENT APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE DIFFERENT ASSE SSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT(A) RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YE ARS 2012-13/ 2013- 14/ 2014-15 AND ALSO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06/ 2008 -09/ 2010-11 AND 2011-12 AGAINST RESPECTIVE ORDERS PASSED BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 143(3)/144 OF THE ACT. PAGE | 10 2. THE PRESENT BUNCH OF APPEALS HAVE BEEN LISTED FO R HEARING AND WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE SAME BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORD ER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. IN THIS BUNCH OF APPEALS, THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE APPEALS EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE AND WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE ADDITION. IN S OME APPEALS, THE APPEAL HAS BEEN DECIDED BY CIT(A) ON MERITS BUT EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. 3. IN SOME OF THE CASES, THERE IS NO REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US BUT BECAUSE OF THE ISSUE INVOLVE D, WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE SAID APPEALS AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED D R FOR THE REVENUE. 4. IT IS A COMMON CASE RAISED BY DIFFERENT ARS FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US THAT THE CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE EX PARTE ORDER WITHOUT ALLOWING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE. IN OTHER CASES, IT IS POINTED OUT THAT WHERE THE CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE ON MERITS BUT EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LEARNED DR FOR THE REVENUE ON THE OTHER HAND POINTED OUT THAT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY HAS BEEN AFFORDED TO THE ASS ESSEE. AND IN SOME CASES, THE CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUES ON MERITS ALSO. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT, IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE APPEALS AFTER HEARING THE PART IES AND STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATION, THE DECISION THEREON AND ALSO TH E REASONS FOR THE DECISION. WHILE DECIDING THE APPEALS, CIT(A) HAS NO POWER TO DISMISS THE PAGE | 11 APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION BY RELYING ON THE RATIO/ S LAID DOWN IN CIT VS. B.N. BHATTACHARYA & ANOTHER 118 ITR 461 (SC) AND LA TE TUKOJI RAO HOLKER VS. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP). IN THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WHERE THE CIT(A) HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL BY APPLYI NG THE ABOVE SAID RATIOS, THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) SUFFERS FRO M INFIRMITY. THE CIT(A) WHILE DECIDING THE ISSUE ON MERITS HAVE ALSO TO PRO VIDE REASONS FOR COMING TO THE CONCLUSION AND IN THE ABSENCE OF THE SAME, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AGAIN SUFFERS FROM INFIRMITY. IN THE PRESENT BUNCH OF APPEALS, WE FIND THAT THAT THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL EX PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE AND IN MOST OF THE CASES, HAD FAILED TO DE CIDE THE APPEALS BY PASSING REASONED ASSESSMENT ORDER. 7. IN SOME OF THE APPEALS, CIT(A) HAD DECIDED THE I SSUE ON MERITS BUT WITHOUT AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. SUCH ORDER/S SUFFERS FROM INFIRMITY AS IT VIOLATES THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. IN SUCH CASES ALSO, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THA T REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING SHOULD BE AFFORDED TO THE AS SESSEE BEFORE DECIDING THE ISSUES ON MERITS. 8. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH DIRECTION TO THE CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERITS BY A REASONED ORDER, AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HE ARING TO THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO APPEAR BEF ORE THE CIT(A) AND PARTICIPATE IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. THE APPEA LS ARE THUS DECIDED ON THIS PRELIMINARY ISSUE WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERIT S OF THE ADDITION. PAGE | 12 9. IN ITA NO. 5199/DEL/2017, WE FIND THAT THE APPEA L OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE CIT(A) AS THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FURNISHED THE APPEAL MEMO ELECTRONICALLY BUT FILED THE SAME MANUA LLY. ON THE DATE OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, B UT WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT I N FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). HENCE THE MATTER IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERIT AFTER AFFORDING REASONABL E OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 10. IN ITA NO. 5199/DEL/2017, THE LEARNED AR FOR TH E ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT ONLY ONE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS THE EARLIER NOTICES WERE NOT SENT TO THE CORRECT ADDRES S. WE REVERSE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE ISSUE ON MERIT BACK T O THE FILE OF CIT(A) WHO SHALL DECIDE THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FILE THE COMMUNICATION BEFORE THE CIT(A ) AND PARTICIPATE IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. 11. HENCE THIS BUNCH OF APPEALS ARE RESTORED BACK T O THE FILE OF RESPECTIVE CIT(A)/S TO DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERITS A FTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COMPLY WITH NOTICES ISSUED BY THE CIT(A ). THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE RAISED IN ALL THE APPEALS IS THUS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE. SINCE THE APPEALS ARE BEING DECIDED ON THE PRELIMIN ARY ISSUE WE ARE NOT ADDRESSING THE ISSUE RAISED ON MERIT. PAGE | 13 12. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019. SD/- SD/- (R.K. PANDA) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) #'+ #'+ #'+ #'+ /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER + + + + /JUDICIAL MEMBER / DATED : 29 TH NOVEMBER, 2019. SH #*!%,-#,%. COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. $/ 0 1 / THE CIT(A) 4. $2 $/ / THE PR. CIT 5. 6. ,34% 5 5 / DR, ITAT, DELHI 467. GUARD FILE. #*$ #*$ #*$ #*$ / BY ORDER , ,%% // TRUE COPY // 9:+; , 5 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI