Amit Saini, New Delhi V. ACIT, Circle-28(1), New Delhi

ITA 9335/DEL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7559 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 04-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SA TYENDRA KUMAR CHATURVEDI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 68; 20

Judgement Text

IN TH E INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO . 93 35 /DEL/20 19 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 6 - 17 AMIT SAINI, A - 178/10, 3 RD FLOOR, DAYANAND COLONY, LAJPAT NAGAR - 4, NEW D ELHI. PAN: AZMPS6422R VS. ACIT, CIRCLE - 28(1), NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) A SSESSEE BY : SHRI SA TYENDRA KUMAR CHATURVEDI, CA RE VENUE BY : SHRI R.K. GUPTA, S R. DR DATE OF HEARING : 2 6 . 0 8 . 20 21 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 . 0 8 . 20 21 ORDER TH IS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE EX PARTE ORDER DATED 0 9.09. 20 19 OF THE CIT(A) - 1 0 , NEW DELHI, RELATIN G TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 6 - 17 . 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: - 1 . THAT THE OR DER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) IS ARBITRARY, AGAINST LAW AND FACTS ON RECORD. 2 . THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT GIVING REASO NABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD . ITA NO. 93 35 /DEL/20 19 2 3 . THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN THE ASSESSING THE INCOME OF THE APPELLANT AT RS. 30,57,200/ - AS AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 2,63,600/ - . 4 . ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEAL HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN THE LAW IN MAKING THE ADDITION U/S 68 IN RESPECT OF AGRICULTURE INCOME OF RS. 27,93,600/ - . 5 . THE APPELLANT HEREIN CRAVES ITS RI GHT TO ALTER, AMEND, ADD AND / OR WITHDRAW ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND / OR TO TAKE ANY ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 3 . FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 2 ND AUGUST, 2017 DECLARING THE T OTAL INCOME AT RS.2,63,600/ - . THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR LIMITED SCRUTINY THROUGH CASS ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN LARGE AGRICULTURAL INCOME. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHO WN AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS.27,93,600/ - . HE, THEREFORE, ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE SAME. HOWEVER, THERE WAS NO PROPER COMPLIANCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WHICH THE AO PROCEEDED TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVA ILABLE ON RECORD AND INFORMATION AVAILABLE AS PER ITD DETAILS. SINCE THERE WAS NO PROPER EXPLANATION FOR EXPLAINING THE INCOME OF RS.27,93,600/ - , THEREFORE, THE AO MADE ADDITION OF THE SAME U/S 68 OF THE IT ACT AND DETERMINED THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE AT RS.30,57,200/ - . SINCE THERE WAS NO APPEARANCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) DESPITE NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES GRANTED, THE LD.CIT(A), IN THE EX PARTE ORDER PASSED BY HIM, DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4 . AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT(A), TH E ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ITA NO. 93 35 /DEL/20 19 3 5 . THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT KEEPING WELL AND WAS UNDER MEDICAL SUPERVISION DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD, HE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(A). REFERRING TO VARIO US PAGES OF THE PAPER BOOK, THE LD. COUNSEL DREW THE ATTENTION OF THE BENCH TO THE PRESCRIPTIONS BY THE DOCTORS AND HOSPITAL RECEIPTS AND SUBMITTED THAT THE NON - APPEARANCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS NOT DELIBERATE, BUT, IT WAS FOR THE REASONS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY , THE ASSESSEE IS IN A POSITION TO SUBSTANTIATE THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME SHOWN BY HIM. HE SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE MATTER HAS NOT BEEN PROPERLY REPRESENTED EITHER BEFORE THE AO OR BEFORE THE CIT(A), THEREFORE, THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DENOVO ASSESSMENT. 6 . T HE LD. DR , ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT DESPITE NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES GRANTED BY THE AO AS WELL AS THE CIT(A), THERE WAS NO PROPER COMPLIANCE . THEREFORE, TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A) SHOULD BE CONFIRMED. 7 . I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL ARGUMENTS MADE BY BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUS ED THE RECORD. IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT DUE TO NON - SUBSTANTIATION OF THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE RETURN OF INCO ME, THE AO MADE ADDITION OF THE SAME TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. I FIND, DUE TO NON - APPEARANCE BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE LD.CIT(A) PASSED THE EX PARTE ORDER DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, I DEEM IT PROPER TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION TO GRANT ONE LAST OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME DECLARED BY HIM AND DECIDE THE ITA NO. 93 35 /DEL/20 19 4 ISSUE AS PER FACT AND LAW. THE A SSESSEE IS ALSO HEREBY DIRECTED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE AO WITHOUT SEEKING ANY ADJOURNMENT UNDER ANY PRETEXT, FAILING WHICH THE AO IS AT LIBERTY TO PASS APPROPRIATE ORDER AS PER LAW. I HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ACCO RDINGLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . TH E DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26. 0 8 . 20 21 . SD/ - ( R. K. PANDA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 26 TH AUGUST, 2021. S H EKHAR , SR. PS COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI