Satpal, New Delhi V. ITO WARD - 65(2), New Delhi

ITA 5456/DEL/2019

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Shri Satpal, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-32, New Delhi, which confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding unexplained income and initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer had made additions to the assessee's income based on the non-provision of cost of acquisition of a property sold and unexplained credit entries in the bank account. The CIT(A) decided the appeal ex-parte due to non-cooperation from the assessee. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the submissions made, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 302647 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 15-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 18-06-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Cost of acquisition; Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 143(1); 69A

Judgement Text

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5456/Del/2019 Asstt. Year: 2012-13 O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM 1. The appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.03.2019 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals-32, New Delhi (“CIT(A)”) pertaining to Assessment Year (“AY”) 2012-13. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: “ 1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessment Order passed by the Assessing Officer is bad-in-law 2. That having regard to the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in making addition of Rs. 53,00,000/- on account of no evidence cost of acquisition of property sold 3. That the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in making an addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- on account of unexplained credit entries in the bank of assessee. 4. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer has erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Shri Satpal H. No. 162, Hamidpur, Narela, New Delhi PAN CPRPS4334D Vs. ITO Ward-65(2) New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Govind Kumar, CA Department by : Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 16.01.2023 Date of pronouncement 23. 01.2023 ITA No. 5456/Del/2019 2 5. That Appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of the appeal at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other. 6. That the appellant has reserved its right to explain the detailed facts at the time of hearing. 7. That without prejudice to the above ground, the assessment made by the Learned Assessing Officer is exorbitant, arbitrary and based on mere surmises and conjectures.” 3. Briefly stated, the assessee is an individual. He filed his return for AY 2012-13 on 27.03.2013 declaring income of Rs. 2,46,480/-. It was duly processed under section 143(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) on 05.05.2013. Thereafter, the case was selected for scrutiny. During assessment proceedings, the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) found that the assessee had sold one property situated at village Hamidpur to M/s. Shakun Farms Pvt. Ltd. along with his two brothers who are also co-owners of the property for a consideration of Rs. 1,59,00,000/- wherein assessee’s share comes to Rs. 54,00,000/-. The Ld. AO asked for details of cost of acquisition of the said property which was not provided on the ground that the property is very old. The Ld. AO also found two credit entries of Rs. 20 lakhs on 27.09.2011 and of Rs. 10 lakhs on 13.12.2011 in his bank pass book. Since the cost of acquisition was not provided in respect of the aforesaid property, the Ld. AO adopted the same as zero and computed long term capital gain at Rs. 53,00,000/-. The assessee did not offer any explanation regarding the above credit entries. Hence the Ld. AO added the same to the income of the assessee under section 69A of the Act. Accordingly, the Ld. AO completed the assessment on total income of Rs. 85,46,480/- on 17.03.2015 under section 143(3) of the Act. 4. The assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Several notices of hearing issued by him remained uncomplied with. However, some additional evidence was filed on 25.11.2016 in the office of the Ld. CIT(A) who asked for remand report from the Ld. AO which was received by him on 05.03.2017 and forwarded to the assessee on 01.08.2017 but the assesee did not make any submission. Again the assesee sent certain documents to ITA No. 5456/Del/2019 3 the Ld. CIT(A) through mail on 18.03.2019 without any application for admittance of additional evidence or written submission in respect of grounds of appeal. The Ld. CIT(A) therefore proceeded to decide the appeal ex-parte due to non-cooperation of the assesee holding that the assessee is not interested in pursuing his appeal. The additions made by the Ld. AO were confirmed. 5. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that all requisite details and documents are available with the assessee now and urged before us that the matter be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR also submitted that he undertakes to co-operate fully in the fresh appellate proceedings. The Ld. DR did not object to the request of the Ld. AR. 7. We have considered the submissions and perused the material in the records. We are of the view that it would be in the interest of justice and fair play if the matter is sent back and restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh decision on merits after appraisal of the evidence already in his records and the evidence that assessee may adduce during appellate proceedings as per law after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties. The assessee, shall co-operate in the appellate proceedings as per the oral undertaking given to us. We order accordingly. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside. 8. In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 23 rd January, 2023. sd/- sd/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) (ASTHA CHANDRA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 23/01/2023 ITA No. 5456/Del/2019 4 Veena Copy forwarded to - 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi Date of dictation Date on which the typed draft is placed before the dictating Member Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Other Member Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr. PS/PS Date on which the final order is uploaded on the website of ITAT Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order Date of dispatch of the Order