Sh. Pramod Kumar Singh, New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 5836/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3178 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 15-05-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 15-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMRIT LAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. SAINI, A CCOUNTANT M EMBER ITA NO. 5836 /DEL/2016 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2008 - 0 9 PRAMOD KUMAR SINGH, FLAT NO. B - 4, TO WER - 2, NEW MOTI BAGH, NEW DELHI - 110023 VS DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 65(1), NEW DELHI - 110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A ERPS3870D ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. AMRIT LAL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 15 .0 5 .20 1 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 .05 .201 7 ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.10.2014 OF LD. CIT(A) - XVII , DELHI . 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEAL: 1). LD. A.O. WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN LA W AND IN FACTS WHILE MAKING THIS ADDITION OF RS. 6,00,000/ - UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAINS; 2). LD. A.O. TOOK A VERY NARROW VIEW OF THE SALE AGREEMENTS FILED WITH HIS RECORD, SUITABLE TO HIS VIEW POINT WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE REAL CONTEXT OF THE AGREEMENT AN D SALES TRANSACTION; 3). LD. A.O. WAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE IS A SENIOR OFFICER OF COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA, ACCEPTED WHOLE CONSIDERATION ITA NO . 5836 /DEL /201 6 PRAMOD KUMAR SINGH 2 THROUGH CHEQUE ONLY AND CAN NEVER EVEN THINK OF CAMOUFLAGE/ HIDING THE TRANSACTION; 4). LD. A.O. EXAMINED EACH AND EVERY TRANSACTION IN THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE FROM INCOME POINT OF VIEW, BUT NOTHING FOUND AS HIDDEN/CAMOUFLAGE; 5). LD. A.O.'S ORDER IS BAD IN LAW AND SAME SHOULD BE CANCELLED FOR SAKE OF JUSTICE. 6). DELAY IN FILIN G THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - XVM MAY PLEASE BE CONDONED SUBJECT TO THE ADJUDICATION OF PETITION FOR DELAY CONDONE FILED SEPARATELY 3 . DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING NOBODY WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NEI THER ANY ADJOURNMENT WAS SOUGHT. I, THEREFORE, PROCEEDED EX - PARTE AND THE APPEAL IS DECIDED AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR. IT IS NOTICED FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE LD. CIT(A) PASSED THE ORDER EX - PARTE WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. CIT(A) MENTIONED THAT THE NOTICE FOR H EARING WAS ISSUED ON 09.10.2014, FIXING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 21.10.2014. BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR FOR THE HEARING. HE NOWHERE STATED THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. 4. IT IS WELL SETTLED THAT NOBOD Y SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AS PER THE MAXIM AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM . I, THEREFORE, KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE ITA NO . 5836 /DEL /201 6 PRAMOD KUMAR SINGH 3 WIT H LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . (O RDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 15 /05 /2017 ) SD/ - (N. K. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DAT ED: 15 /05 /2017 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR