TF Marketing Consultants Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 6187/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1722 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 24-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 6187/DEL/2013 ASSTT. YRS: 2009-10 TF MARKETING CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD., VS. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-XVI, E-96, IIND FLOOR, GREATER KAILASH-I, NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. PAN: AACCT 9131 A ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI RAHUL KAMPANI CA ESPONDENT BY : SHRI YATENDRA SINGH SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 24/07/2015. DATE OF ORDER : 09/10/2015. O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M.. : THIS APPEAL, PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE, IS DIRECT ED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 7-8-2013, PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-19, NEW D ELHI IN APPEAL NO. 113/2012-13, RELATING TO A.Y. 2009-10. FOLLOWING GR OUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED: A) THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED (IT (A) 19 IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AS HE HAS NOT AFFORDED US SUFFIC IENT OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT OUR CASE AND AS ALSO NOT TAK EN COGNIZANCE OF OUR APPEARANCE BEFORE HIM ON 11 JULY 2013. FURTH ER THE PURPORTED SPEED POST RECEIPT DATED 23/07/2013 THROU GH WHICH THE NOTICE FOR HEARING ON 01/08/2013 WAS SENT ALSO DOES NOT FIND A PLACE IN THE ONSITE RECORDS OF THE POSTAL DEPARTM ENT ON THE SITE WWW.INDIAPOST.GOV.IN/TRACKING.ASPX B) THE DEMAND OF THE LEARNED (IT(A) IS TOTALLY UNJU STIFIED, ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT ANY BASIS. HE HAS ACTED IN A HI GHLY ARBITRARY 2 MANNER WHEREBY HE HAS IGNORED ALL THE CONTENTS AND CLAIMS MADE IN THE RETURN AND HAS SOLELY RELIED UPON HIS D ISCRETION IN CALCULATING THE VALUE OF FRINGE BENEFITS. C) THE VALUE OF FRINGE BENEFIT AS SHOWN IN ITR-V IS RS24839=00(PG 2 AND TAX ON THE SAME WORKS OUT TO RS8455=00 WHICH HAS BEEN DULY PAID. FURTHER MORE IN THE COMPUTATION OF FRINGE BENEFITS(PG 13 ) THE SAME FIG URE IS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST WHICH HE HAS DEPO SITED RS.11489=OO AS ADVANCE TAX THUS ENTITLING HIM TO A REFUND OF RS3030 (PAGE 13 OF ITR-6). D) THE CALCULATION OF VALUE FRINGE BENEFIT AS SHOWN IN SCHEDULE FB IS RS190606=OO (PG.26 ) ,THE AMOUNT OF EXPENDITU RE, WHICH AFTER APPLYING THE RELEVANT SLABS THE VALUE O F FRINGE BENEFITS WORKS OUT TO RS.24389=OO.HE HAS TOTALLY IG NORED THESE FIGURES WHILE CALCULATING THE VALUE OF FRINGE BENEFITS AND FURTHER MORE WHEN THE INCOME TAX RETURN, WHICH IS P ART OF THE COMPOSITE RETURN FILED, WAS AVAILABLE WITH HIM FOR VERIFICATION OF THE FIGURES OF EXPENDITURE (ON PG 8) AND CALCULA TION OF THE VALUE OF FRINGE BENEFITS THE LEARNED AO SHOULD HAVE TAKEN COGNIZANCE OF THE FIGURES ON RECORD TO ARRIVE AT TH E FIGURE OF FRINGE BENEFITS. E) THE LEARNED AO HAS PICKED UP THE FIGURE OF FRING E BENEFITS FROM ITEM NO. 24A WHEREIN WE WERE REQUIRED TO MENTI ON THE VALUE OF FRINGE BENEFITS WHERE AS WE HAVE ERRONEOUS LY MENTION THE VALUE OF EXPENDITURE. SINCE IN THE CLAIMING PA RT -C OF THE ITR-6 THE FIGURE OF RS24389=00 MATCHES WITH THE SCH EDULE FB OF THE FORM THERE IS NO REASON FOR THE LEARNED AO T O TAKE THE FIGURE OTHER THAN THAT MENTIONED IN THE CLAIMING PA RT AND THE SCHEDULE FB ANNEXED THERE TO. 2. BEFORE US, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APP EAL, EX PARTE, QUA THE ASSESSEE. 3 HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED C IT(A) BEING NON-SPEAKING ORDER AND CANNOT STAND IN THE EYE OF LAW. 3. LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). 4. I HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS DISPOSED OF THE ASSESS EES APPEAL, EX PARTE, QUA THE ASSESSEE, OBSERVING THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT SUBSTANTI ATE ITS CLAIM. SINCE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PRESENT, THEREFORE, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE SUBSTAN TIAL JUSTICE TO ASSESSEE, I CONSIDER IT APPROPRIATE TO PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IN C ONFORMITY WITH THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS ACCORDI NGLY SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO HIS FILE TO DECIDE THE APPEAL DE NOVO IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, OF COURSE, AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF B EING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. I ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 09/10/2015. SD/- (S.V. MEHROTRA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 09/10/2015. *MP* COPY OF ORDER TO: 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. 4 -+ DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON - 09.2015 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR .09.2015 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER.