Sujeet Kumar Mishra, New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 5872/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8022 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 17-05-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 01-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIMA BERNWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: GEETANJALI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : G : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM ITA NO.5872/DEL/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SUJEET KUMAR MISHRA, 102, LAWYERS CHAMBER, BLOCK-III, DELHI HIGH COURT, NEW DELHI. PAN; AITPM2677A VS. ITO, WARD-37(3), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : MS GEETANJALI DEPARTMENT BY : MS ANIMA BERNWAL, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 17.05.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.05.2016 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 12.8.2013 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2008-09. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF ADDITION OF RS.10,80,000/- TOWARDS CASH DEPOSIT IN THE ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT. THE AO GOT AN AIR INFORMATION INDICATING THAT THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS.10.80 LAC IN HIS SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT MAINTAINED ITA NO.5872/DEL/2013 2 WITH AXIS BANK LTD. ON BEING CALLED UPON TO FURNIS H THE SOURCE OF SUCH CASH DEPOSIT IN THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT, THE ASSES SEE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT. ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY WAS GRANTED, WHI CH WAS NOT AVAILED BY THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE ASSESSMENT WAS GETTING TIME BARRED, THE AO FINALIZED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 144 OF THE ACT, MAKING ADDITION OF RS.10.80 LAC. THE LD. CIT(A) SUSTAINED THE ADDITION. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED U/S 144 OF THE ACT WITHOUT GRANTING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT HIS CASE AND THE SAME POSITION PREVAILED IN SO FAR AS THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS ARE CONCERNED. IT WAS, THERE FORE, PRAYED THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY BE GRANTED FOR PUTTING FORTH THE E NTIRE FACTUAL POSITION IN RIGHT PERSPECTIVE EXPLAINING THE SOURCE OF CASH. W E FIND THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN ASPECTS WHICH ARE NOT CLEAR FROM THE ASSESS MENT ORDER FOR THE OBVIOUS REASON OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAVING BEEN PASSED U/S 144. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNE D ORDER AND REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO FOR DECIDING THE ISSUE AFR ESH, AS PER LAW, AFTER ALLOWING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.5872/DEL/2013 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.05.201 6. ; SD/- SD/- [SUCHITRA KAMBLE] [R.S. SYAL] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED,18 TH MAY, 2016. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.