Anukesh Sharma, Ghaziabad V. ITO, Ward-1(1), Ghaziabad

ITA 7686/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9640 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 04-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: EKTA VISHNOI
• Assessee Lawyers: VIPIN GARG
• Keywords: Gift; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; TDS; Set aside
• Section: 201; 148

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH SMC : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 7686/DEL/2018 (A.Y. 2010-11) ANUKESH SHARMA, C/O VIPIN GARG, FCA, LLB R-2, 2 ND FLOOR, RAJ KUNJ, RAJ NAGAR, GHAZIABAD (PAN: BCAPS2633G) VS. ITO, WARD 1(1), GHAZIABAD ASSESSEE BY SH. VIPIN GARG, ADV. REVENUE BY MS. EKTA VISHNOI, SR. DR. ORDER ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGN ED ORDER DATED 28.09.2018 PASSED BY LD. CIT(A), GHAZIABAD ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. BECAUSE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S. 147/143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT ON 18.12.2017 FOR AY 201 0-11 MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 12,65,000/- U/S. 69 OF TH E ACT, BY ILLEGALLY REJECTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FILE D BY THE APPELLANT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CAS E AND AGAINST THE ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTI CE. 2. BECAUSE THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS INITIATED AND RE ASONS RECORDED ARE AGAINST THE LAW IN TERMS OF LEGAL PRO VISIONS AND JURISDICTION U/S. 147/148 OF THE ACT. 2 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE LEAVE TO ADD, MODIFY, AMEND OR DELETE ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND ALL THE ABOVE GROUNDS ARE WITHOUT PREJU DICE TO EACH OTHER. 2. FACTS NARRATED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ARE NO T DISPUTED BY BOTH THE PARTIES, HENCE, THE SAME ARE NOT REPEATED HERE FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE STATED THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES UNDER RULE 46A OF THE I.T. RULES, 1962 BEFORE THE L D. CIT(A), BUT THE SAME WAS WRONGLY REJECTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS VERY MUCH ESSENTIAL TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE . ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED THE PAPER BOOK CONTAINING PAGES 1-118 IN WHIC H HE HAS ATTACHED VARIOUS DOCUMENTS AND THE COPY OF SUBMISSIONS /RULE 46 A CONTAINING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AT ANNEXURE-A2 TO 8. HE STATED THAT THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE REQUIRES THOROUGH CONSIDERATION AT THE LEVE L OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HENCE, HE REQUESTED THAT THE ISSUES IN DIS PUTE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION WITH THE DIRECTIONS TO ACCEPT ALL THE EVIDENCES TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHIC H ARE VERY ESSENTIAL FOR DETERMINATION OF THE MATTER. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. DR DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIO US OBJECTION ON THE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE R ECORDS ESPECIALLY THE ORDER OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES INCLUDING THE ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK CONTAINING PAGES 1-118, IN WHICH ASSESSEES COUNSE L HAS ATTACHED THE COPY OF REASONS RECORDED U/S. 148 OF THE ACT; COPY OF COMMUNICATION OF APPROVAL U/S. 151 OF THE I.T. ACT FROM THE OFFICE O F PR. CIT TO ADDL. CIT, RECEIVED IN HIS OFFICE ON 30.3.3017; COPY OF COMMU NICATION OF APPROVAL U/S. 151 OF THE I.T. ACT FROM THE OFFICE OF ADDL. C IT TO ITO WARD 1(1), 3 RECEIVED IN HIS OFFICE ON 30.3.3017; COPY OF NOTICE DATED 29.3.2017 U/S. 148 OF THE I.T. ACT; COPY OF EMAIL NOTICE DATED 30. 3.2017 U/S. 148 OF THE ACT; CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER SHEET OF ASSESSMENT P ROCEEDINGS EXHIBITING ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S. 148 ON 29.3.2017; COPY OF PAN DATA EXTRACTED FROM I.T. DEPARTMENT. WEBSITE WWW.INCOMETAXINDIAEFILING.GOV.IN ; COPY OF ITR FOR AY 2016-17 FILED ON 5.8.2016; COPY OF ENQUIRY L ETTERS BY AO FROM HDFC BANK IN THE MONTH OF OCT/DEC/2017 AND REPLY OF HDFC BANK ON RESPONSE THEREOF ON 13.12.2017; COPY OF ITR U/S. 14 8, TDS CERTIFICATE, FORM 26AS ETC.; COPY OF RELY FILED BEFORE AO; COPY OF SUBMISSIONS /RULE 46A APPLICATION FILED BEFORE LD. CIT(A) 27.9.2018 CONTAINING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AT ANNEXURE A-2 TO 8 THEREOF I.E. MEDICAL REPORTS AND DEATH CERTIFICATE OF THE MOTHER OF THE APPELLANT; COPY OF SALE DEED BY MOTHER OF THE APPELLANT TO EXPLAIN SOURCE OF CASH IN HER HAND S; COPY OF CASH RECEIPT OF SALE OF MOTOR CAR; COPY OF ICICI BANK STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT; COPY OF GIFT DEED BY MATERNAL UNCLE OF THE APPELLANT ALO NGWITH BANK STATEMENT, PAN CARD ETC OF THE DONOR; COPY OF GIFT DEED BY UNC LE OF THE APPELLANT ALONGWITH BANK STATEMENT, PAN CARD ETC. OF THE DONO R; COPY OF GIFT DEED BY FATHER IN LAW OF THE APPELLANT ALONGWITH BANK ST ATEMENT, PAN CARD ETC. OF THE DONOR. I FURTHER NOTE THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS N OT ALLOWED THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION FILED UNDER RULE 46A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES, WHICH ARE VERY ESSENTIAL IN DETERMINATION OF THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JU STICE, IN MY OPINION, THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE REQUIRE THOROUGH EXAMINATIO N AND FRESH ADJUDICATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, I REMIT BACK THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE TO THE FILES OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTIONS TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH, AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND CONSIDER ALL THE EV IDENCES TO BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED THROUGH H IS COUNSEL TO FULLY COOPERATE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE PRO CEEDINGS AND WILL NOT TAKE ANY UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT. ASSESSEE IS AT LI BERTY TO FILE ANY EVIDENCES FOR SUBSTANTIATING ITS CLAIM. 4 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 03 RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019. SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED THE 03.10.2019 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A), NEW DELHI. 5. CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI AR, ITAT 5