Bhal Singh S/o Sh. Mange Ram, Hisar V. ITO, Ward-1, Hisar

ITA 8711/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1974 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-05-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause; Tangible material; Reason to believe
• Section: 147; 68

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 8711/DEL/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: I(2) + SM C-1 NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEM BER, AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOU NTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 8711/DEL/2019 ( A.Y 2009-10) BHAL SINGH S/O SH. MANGE RAM 151, KALA MANDIR, PALIKA BAZAR, HISAR, HARYANA PIN 125001 PAN: BZTPS8530G (APPELLANT) VS ITO WARD-1 HISAR, HARYANA (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY MS. MONIKA AGGARWAL, CA RESPONDENT BY SH. PRADEEP SINGH GAUTAM, SR. DR ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER DATED 28/01/2019 PASSED BY CIT(A)-HISAR, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016-1 7. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THAT BOTH THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTI ON 147 OF THE ACT AND, COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147/143(3) O F THE ACT WERE WITHOUT JURISDICTION AND HENCE DESERVE TO BE QUASHED AS SUC H. 1.1. THAT SINCE THERE WAS NO SPECIFIC RELEVANT, REL IABLE AND TANGIBLE MATERIAL ON RECORD TO FORM A REASON TO BELIEVE TH AT INCOME OF THE APPELLANT HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AND IN VIEW THEREOF THE PROC EEDINGS INITIATED ARE ILLEGAL U/S 147 OF THE ACT, UNTENABLE AND THEREFORE UNSUSTAINABLE. DATE OF HEARING 05.03.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12.05.2020 2 ITA NO. 8711/DEL/2019 1.2. THAT REASONS WERE RECORDED MECHANICALLY WITHOU T APPLICATION OF MIND AND THEREFORE DO NOT CONSTITUTE VALID REASON TO BELIEVE FOR ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION U/S 147 OF THE ACT. 1.3. THAT IN ABSENCE OF ANY VALID APPROVAL OBTAINED UNDER SECTION 151 OF THE ACT, INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 OF THE A CT AND ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 147/143(3) OF THE ACT ARE INVALID AND DESERVE T O BE QUASHED AS SUCH. 2. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) HAS FURTHER ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DISPOSING OFF THE APPEA L EX-PARTEE WITHOUT GRANTING ANY FAIR OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT. 2.1 THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE APPELLANT FOR NOT CAUSING APPEARANCE ON THE DATES FIXED FOR HEARING AND AS SU CH DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL WITHOUT GRANTING FAIR, MEANINGFUL AND PROPER OPPORT UNITY IS UNTENABLE. 2.2 THAT EVEN OTHERWISE, AN ORDER PASSED IN LIMINI WITHOUT EFFECTIVELY DISPOSING OF THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE APPELLANT IS INFRACTION OF SECTION 250(6) OF THE ACT AND AS SUCH, ORDER SO MADE IS OTHERWISE TOO ILLEGAL, INVALID AND A VITIATED ORDER. 3. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1 0,00,000- REPRESENTING ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOU NT OF THE APPELLANT. 4. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT IN ABSENCE OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS MAI NTAINED BY THE APPELLANT SECTION 68 OF THE ACT HAS NO APPLICATION TO THE CAS E OF THE APPELLANT. PRAYER: IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT, IT BE HELD TH AT ORDER DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL EX-PARTE BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) BE SET-ASIDE. IT IS FURTHER PRAYED THAT ASSESSMENT MAD E BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER AND SUSTAINED BY THE LEARNED COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 3 ITA NO. 8711/DEL/2019 (APPEALS) DESERVES TO BE QUASHED AS SUCH. IT IS ALS O PRAYED THAT, ADDITION MADE AND SUSTAINED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS) MAY KINDLY BE DELETED AND, APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT BE ALLOWED. 3. THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING SAVING BANK A/C IN INDU SLAND BANK AS A JOINT HOLDER WITH SH. KRISHAN & VIRENDER. THERE WERE CAS H DEPOSITS ON DIFFERENT DATES AMOUNTING TO RS. 10,00,000/- FOR WHICH ADDITI ON HAS BEEN MADE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASS ESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NOT DEC IDED THE CASE ON MERIT AND DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON PROSECUTION. THE L D. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE NOTICE WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. A R FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THERE WERE CASH DEPOSITS ON DIFFERENT DATES AMOUNTI NG TO RS. 10,00,000/- FOR WHICH ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE IN THE CASE OF THE ASS ESSEE WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ACCOUNT WAS HELD BY THREE PERSON JOINTLY AND OTHER EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE SUCH AS DEPOSITS WERE M ADE BY ALL THE THREE PERSONS FROM PAST SAVINGS. 6. THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE CIT(A) DIS MISSED THE MATTER FOR NON PROSECUTION AND THE REASON FOR NON APPEARING BEFORE THE CIT(A) BY THE ASSESSEE IS GENUINENESS AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED NOT ICE. THEREFORE, IT WILL BE APPROPRIATE TO REMAND BACK THE CONTESTING ISSUES TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) FOR PROPER ADJUDICATION. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSEE BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BY FOLLOWING PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 4 ITA NO. 8711/DEL/2019 8. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 12 TH DAY OF MAY, 2020 . SD/- SD/- (PRASHANT MAHARISHI) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER DATED: 12/05/2020 R. NAHEED COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 5 ITA NO. 8711/DEL/2019 DATE OF DICTATION 12.03.2020 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 13.03.2020 DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT 1 3 . 5 . 2 0 2 0 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER