Sunil Kumar Sharma, Ghaziabad V. ITO, Ward-2(3), Ghaziabad

ITA 8308/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2305 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 28-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C P SINGH
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Set aside

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI SMC-I BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 8308/DEL/2018 [ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11] SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA, VS. ITO, WARD-2(3), II-B-130, NEHRU NAGAR, GHAZIABAD GHAZIABAD UTTAR PRADESH-201010 (PAN: BDIPS6377Q) [APPELLANT] [RESPONDENT] ASSESSEE BY: SHRI SATYAJEET GOEL, CA & SH. PRATEEK GUPTA, CA REVENUE BY : SH. C.P. SINGH, SR. D R. ORDER THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [APPEALS], GHAZIABAD DAT ED 31.10.2018 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ON THE FOLLOW ING GROUNDS:- 1. THAT THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS AGAINST FACTS AND B AD IN LAW AS THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) REJECTING THE ASSESSEE SUBMISSION ON THE SOLE GROUND THAT APPLICA TION FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES UNDER RULE 46 A NOT FILED BY THE APPELLANT. 2. THAT THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS AGAINST FACTS AND B AD IN LAW AS THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT TH AT THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BEFORE HER CLEARLY P OINTED OUT THAT NO ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ARE BEING SUBMITTE D BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND ALL THE DOCUMENTS WERE PRESENTED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING ALSO. 3. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 2 18,73,000/- BY TREATING THE AMOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT TO BE UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT. 4. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS ND IN LAW IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 18,73,000/- BEING THE TOTAL AMOU NT OF CASH DEPOSIT MADE DURING THE YEAR EVEN WHEN DOCUMEN TS AND INFORMATION FURNISHED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS STATES THAT ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED AN AM OUNT OF RS. 13,38,000/- IN CASH ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY. 5. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AD/ ALTER ALL OR ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEAR ING OF THE APPEAL. 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 DRAW MY ATTENTION TOWARDS PARA NO. 5 TO 5.2 AT PAGE NO. 10 & 11 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND STATED THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED A NON-S PEAKING ORDER ON THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE AND REQUESTED THAT THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE S AME AFRESH AND PASS A SPEAKING ORDER, AFTER CONSIDERING THE PAPER BOOK FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. C IT(A). 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE O RDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ESPECIALLY THE IMPUGNED ORD ER, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT PASSED A SPEAKING ORDER AND NOT CONSIDERED DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE THOROU GHLY. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN TH E PRESENT APPEAL ARE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH, AS PER LAW, AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO CONSIDER THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES FILED IN THE SHA PE OF PAPER BOOK CONTAINING PAGES 1-58 IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS ATT ACHED THE COPY OF COMPUTATION AND ITR FOR AY 2010-11; COPY OF BALANC E SHEET AND P&L OF 3 BUSINESS FOR AY 2010-11; SALE DEED OF PROPERTY SITU ATED AT MANSAROVAR PARK, SHAHPUR BAMHETA DATED 28.8.2009; BANK STATEME NT OF ACCOUNT NO. 00800100019103 MAINTAINED WITH BANK OF BARODA FOR F Y 2009-10; SALE DEED OF PROPERTY SITUATED AT VILLAGE KUDIKHERA PARG ANA & TEHSIL DADRI DATED 30.3.2009 AND REPLY SUBMITTED BY APPELLANT AN D NOTICES ISSUED BY THE AO RELEVANT TO AY 2010-11. THE ASSESSEE HAS A LSO CERTIFIED THAT THE AFORESAID DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES WERE SUBMITTED BEFO RE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 19.03.2020. SD/- [H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:19-03-2020 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) ASST. REGISTRAR, 5. DR ITAT, NEW DELHI