Rajendra Agrawal, New Delhi V. ITO ward-30(2), New Delhi

ITA 9066/DEL/2019

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Rajender Agarwal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, New Delhi, which was dated 03/10/2019 for the assessment year 2012-13. The primary contention was the improper service of notice and the subsequent ex-parte decision made by the CIT(A), which the assessee argued was in violation of natural justice. Additionally, there were disputes regarding the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer and the incorrect allowance of deduction under section 54 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's arguments regarding the notice and hearing process, leading to the remand of the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 112585 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 07-12-2022
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 21-08-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Revision of order; Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 263; 143(3)

Judgement Text

1 ITA No. 9066/Del/2019 Rajender Agarwal, Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH : “F” NEW DELHI ] BEFORE DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 9066/DEL/2019 (A.Y 2012-13) Rajendra Agarwal Raj Kumar & Associates Chartered Accountant L-7A (LGF), South Extension Part-2, New Delhi PAN No. ACRPA4020F (APPELLANT) Vs. ITO Ward-30(2) New Delhi (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to CIT (Appeals) dated 03/10/2019 for assessment year 2012-13. Assessee by Sh. Rajkumar Gupta CA & Sh. J. P.Sharma, CA Department by Shri K. K. Mishra, Sr. D. R.; Date of Hearing 08.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement 13.12.2022 2 ITA No. 9066/Del/2019 Rajender Agarwal, Vs. ITO 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. That under the facts and circumstances, the ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT (A) is unsustainable in law as well as on facts, more so as no proper and reasonable opportunity of hearing has been allowed by the CIT(A) and the assessee had no knowledge and information of the appeal being fixed for hearing before CIT (A) on various dates. 2. That without prejudice, under the facts and circumstances, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in not deciding the appeal substantively on merits even in case of deciding the appeal ex-parte and in not adjudicating upon all the grounds before him. 3. That under the facts and circumstances, the Ld. A.O. has exceeded his jurisdiction by not strictly following and working within the four corners of directions and findings in order u/s.263, hence the impugned order is not sustainable in law being without jurisdiction and illegal. 4. That under the facts and circumstances, the Ld. A.O. committed serious legal and factual errors in allowing deduction u/s.54 only for Rs. 11,08,402/- against correctly claimed at Rs.64,23,843/-, thus short by Rs.53,15,441/-. 4.1 That in view of the submissions, evidences furnished and the settled legal position as per case laws, the deduction u/s.54 should have been allowed for Rs.64,23,843/-.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessment for the Assessment Year 2012-13 was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act at returned income of Rs. 7,66,620/-. Subsequently, the Ld.CIT (A)-10 has passed an order u/s 263 of 3 ITA No. 9066/Del/2019 Rajender Agarwal, Vs. ITO the Income Tax Act 1961 (‘Act’ for short) on 17/03/2017 and set aside the assessment order to the file of Assessing Officer to be framed afresh. Assessment order came to be passed on 02/05/2017 u/s 263/143 (3) of the Act by assessing the income of the assessee at 60,82,060/- as against declared income of Rs. 7,67,620/-. 4. As against the assessment order, the assessee has preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) the Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 03/10/2019 dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 03/10/2019 the assessee has preferred the present appeal on the grounds mentioned above. 5. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has contended that the assessee has declared the address of the assessee before the CIT(A) in Serial No. 17 of the Form No. 35 reads as under:- “Raj Kumar & Associates Chartered Accountants L-7A (Lower Ground Floor) South extension, Part-II New Delhi-110049 [e-mail]” But during the Appeal proceedings, the Ld.CIT(A) has issued notice to “Sh. Rajenda Agrawal 33m 4 th Floor, NI Complex, Mandakini, Greater Kailash-IV, New Delhi-110019” Further submitted that, the ex-parte Order has been passed by the CIT (A) in violation of the principles of natural justice, therefore, sought for remanding the matter to the file of CIT(A) for fresh consideration. 4 ITA No. 9066/Del/2019 Rajender Agarwal, Vs. ITO 6. The Ld. DR has submitted that he has no objection to remand the matter to the file of CIT(A) for de-novo consideration of the matter on merit afresh. 7. We have heard the parties perused the materials available on record and gave our thoughtful consideration. 8. It is found that the Ld.CIT (A) has issued notice to the address other than the address provided by the assessee in Column No. 17 of Form 35, therefore, the notice sent by the Ld.CIT(A) has not been served on the assessee. Further, the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without hearing the assessee. Therefore, without expressing anything on the merit of the case, we are of the opinion that, it is fit case to be remanded to the file of CIT(A) for de-novo consideration with a direction to hear the assessee and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the Open Court on : 13.12.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (B. R. R. KUMAR) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 13/12/2022 *R. N, SR. PS* Copy forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI 5 ITA No. 9066/Del/2019 Rajender Agarwal, Vs. ITO