Meerut Charitable Welfare Society, Meerut V. ITO(Exemption)Ward, Ghaziabad

ITA 5705/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6164 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 04-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MUNSHI RAM BIHAGRA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Set aside
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCHES (CAMP AT MEERUT) BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.5705/DEL./2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16) MEERUT CHARITABLE WELFARE SOCIETY, VS. ITO (EXEMPTI ON) WARD, C/O SHAHIDA NOOR, MEERUT. N 102, ERA GARDENIA ESTATE, DELHI ROAD, MEERUT. (PAN : AACAM4291Q) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI MUNSHI RAM BIHAGRA, SENIOR DR DATE OF HEARING : 10.01.2019 DATE OF ORDER : 24.01.2019 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE APPELLANT, MEERUT CHARITABLE WELFARE SOCIETY (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ASSESSEE) BY FILI NG THE PRESENT APPEALS, SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DAT ED 29.06.2018 PASSED BY LD. CIT (APPEALS), MEERUT QUA THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2015- 16 ON THE GROUNDS INTER ALIA THAT :- 1 THE LEARNED CIT (APPEAL) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED BY P ARTLY DISMISSING THE APPEAL. ITA NO.5705/DEL./2018 2 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) HAS ERRED IN SUMMARILY REJECTING THE PLEA OF THE APPELL ANT WITH RESPECT TO FOLLOWING. A) THAT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED ON FACT BY ARBITRARY EXPENDITURE OF RS.7,71,552/- OF A PPELLANT SOCIETY. B) THAT THE SEVERAL OBSERVATIONS AS MADE AND INFERENCES DRAWN ARE UNTENABLE, INCORRECT, UNWARRAN TED. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDICAT ION OF THE CONTROVERSY AT HAND ARE : ASSESSING OFFICER FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) BY DISALLOWING THE AMOUNT OF RS.7,71,352/- OUT OF E XPENDITURE OF RS.15,43,104/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUN D THAT DESPITE ISSUANCE OF NUMEROUS REPEATED NOTICES, THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO JOIN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 3. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BY WAY OF AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) WHO HAS PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL . FEELING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS COME UP BEFORE THE TRIB UNAL BY WAY OF FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. 4. ASSESSEE HAS NOT PREFERRED TO PUT IN APPEARANCE DESPITE ISSUANCE OF THE NOTICE AND CONSEQUENTLY, WE PROCEED ED TO DECIDE THE PRESENT APPEAL WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD. D R AS WELL AS ON THE BASIS OF DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON THE FILE. ITA NO.5705/DEL./2018 3 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIV E FOR THE REVENUE TO THE APPEAL, GONE THROUGH THE DOCUMENTS R ELIED UPON AND ORDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW IN T HE LIGHT OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 6. BARE PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (A) GOES TO PROVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOUGHT TO L EAD ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BY MOVING AN APPLICATION UNDER RULE 46 OF THE INCOME- TAX RULES, 1962 (FOR SHORT THE RULES) TO PROVE HI S CASE, BUT THE LD. CIT (A) DISMISSED THE APPLICATION ON THE GROUND THA T SINCE NUMEROUS OPPORTUNITIES HAVE ALREADY BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE AO. ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR ANY FURTHE R OPPORTUNITY TO ADDUCE EVIDENCE. 7. SINCE UNDISPUTEDLY THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRE SENTED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THOUGH THE AO CL AIMED TO HAVE ISSUED NUMEROUS NOTICES BUT IT IS NOT VISIBLE FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IF ANY OF THE NOTICES ISSUED WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE AND IF SERVED, ON WHICH DATE. MOREOVER, WHEN THE ASSES SEE HAS COME UP WITH APPLICATION UNDER RULE 46 OF THE RULES BEFO RE THE LD. CIT (A) TO ADDUCE THE EVIDENCE PARTICULARLY WHEN ASSESS MENT IS FRAMED EX-PARTE AS IN THE APPEAL, ASSESSEE HAS THE VESTED RIGHT TO PROVE HIS CASE IRRESPECTIVE OF HIS NON-APPEARANCE BEFORE AO, WHICH CANNOT BE DENIED BY CIT (A). SO, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ITA NO.5705/DEL./2018 4 ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BE ING HEARD BEFORE PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 8. IN VIEW OF WHAT HAS BEEN DISCUSSED ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FRAMED AG AINST THE ASSESSEE U/S 144 OF THE ACT IS LIABLE TO BE SET ASI DE, CONSEQUENTLY THE CASE IS REMANDED BACK TO THE AO TO DECIDE AFRES H AFTER PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSE SSEE. 9. RESULTANTLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 24 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019. SD/- SD/- (N.S. SAINI) (KULDIP SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 24 TH DAY OF JANUARY , 2019 TS COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT(A), MEERUT. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.