Sanjeev Yadav, Gurgaon V. ITO, Ward- 61(5), New Delhi

ITA 7411/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9949 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-07-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAKASH DUBEY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G : NEW DELHI) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE ) BEFORE SHRI O.P.KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.7411/DEL./2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 SANJEEV YADAV, VS. ITO, 106, BLOCK NO. -18, WARD 61(5) HERITAGE CITY, GURGAON NEW DELHI (PAN : AABPY6301K) (APPELLIANT) (RESPONDE NT) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI PRAKASH DUBEY, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 07.07.2021 DATE OF ORDER : 27.07.2021 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : APPELLANT, SANJEEV YADAV (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ASSESSEE) BY FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL SOUGHT TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 24.11.2017 PASSED BY THE COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-20, NEW DELHI QUA THE ASSESSME NT YEAR 2014-15 ON THE GROUNDS INTER ALIA THAT : ITA NO.7411/DEL./2017 2 IN THE APPEAL FILED, THE APPELLANT HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- 1. ASSESSING THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 1,06,16,830/- AS AGA INST RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 4,55,750/-. 2. TREATING AMOUNT OF RS. 91,45,500/- ON A/C OF BANK D EPOSIT AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT . 3. HOLDING THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 24,13,907/- IS THE I NCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IN ADDITION TO INCOME OF RS. 3,04,98,2 85/-. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS NECESSARY FOR ADJUDI CATION OF THE CONTROVERSY AT HAND ARE : DURING THE SCRUTINY PROC EEDINGS ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS. 83, 48,500/- IS LYING DEPOSITED IN VARIOUS ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. THER E IS A DIFFERENCE OF INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS. 24,13,907/- AS PER 26AS AND AIR AND THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. ASSESS ING OFFICER ALSO NOTICED CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 85,48,500/- AND RS. 6,8 6,500/- IN THE ANDHRA BANK TOTAL AMOUNTING TO RS. 91,45,500/- WHIC H THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN. DECLINING THE CONTENTIO N RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AO PROCEEDED TO MADE ADDITION OF RS. 24,13 ,907/- AND RS. 91,45,500/- AND THEREBY ASSESS THE TOTAL INCOME OF ASSESSEE AT RS. 1,06,18,803/. 3. ASSESSEE HAS NOT PREFERRED TO PUT IN APPEARANCE DESPITE ISSUANCE OF THE NOTICES, CONSEQUENTLY, WE PROCEEDED TO DECIDE THE PRESENT APPEAL WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF THE LD. DR AS WELL AS ON THE BASIS OF DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON THE FILE. ITA NO.7411/DEL./2017 3 4. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A ) BY WAY OF FILING THE APPEAL WHO HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL. FEELING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE HAS COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY WAY OF FILING THE PRESENT APPEAL. 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) SHOWS THAT THE SAME HAS BEEN PASSED EX PARTE THOUGH ON MERIT BUT WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE. PERUSAL OF PARA 4.1 SHOWS THAT NOTICES FOR PROCURING THE PRESENCE OF THE ASSE SSEE WERE ISSUED ON EMAIL ADDRESS AS WELL AS BY WAY OF SPEED POST B UT LETTER SENT BY POST RECEIVED BACK WITH REMARKS LEFT. THIS FACTS GOES TO PROVE THAT LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT GETTING THE ASSESSEE SERVED PROCEEDED TO TREAT ASSESSEE EX PARTE BY RECORDING HER SATISFACT ION THAT IT IS APPARENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DELIBERATELY NOT CO MPLIED ON THE GIVEN DATE OF HEARING. STRANGELY ENOUGH WHEN ASSE SSEE HAS APPARENTLY NOT BEEN SERVED UPON, HOW WE CAN EXPECT HIM TO PUT IN APPEARANCE DURING APPELLANT PROCEEDING BEFORE LD. C IT(A). 7. KEEPING IN VIEW THE AFORESAID FACTS AND CIRCUMST ANCES, WE ITA NO.7411/DEL./2017 4 ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT IN ORDER TO DECIDE ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL ONCE FOR ALL, ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY O F BEING HEARD IS REQUIRED TO BE GRANTED. SO, WE HEREBY SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) AND REMIT THE CASE BACK TO HIM TO DECIDE AFRESH AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BY GE TTING HIM SERVED AS PER LAW. 8. RESULTANTLY, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 27 TH DAY OF JULY, 2021. SD/- SD/- (O.P.KANT) (KULDIP SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 27 TH DAY OF JULY, 2021 BINITA COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.