A.K.G. Associates (P) Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITSSA 5/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3399 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R C D AN DE

Judgement Text

1 IT(SS)A NO. 5/DEL/2016 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: A NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEM BER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDI CIAL MEMBER IT(SS)A NO. 5/DEL/2016 (A.Y 1/ 4/1996 TO 7/5/2002) A. K. G. ASOOOCIATES (P) LTD. 17/83, THAN SINGH NAGAR, ANAND PARBAT NEW DELHI AACCA0672P (APPELLANT) VS DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-16 NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY NONE RESPONDENT BY SH. R. C. DANDE, SR. DR ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM THE APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORD ER DATED 12/1/2016 PASSED BY CIT(A)-27, NEW DELHI. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING NON FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS APPEARED. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN THE LAW THE CIT(A) WAS INCORRECT AND UNJUSTIFIED IN : A) DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. B) DISPOSING THE APPEAL WITHOUT CONSIDERING AND DISPO SING THE EACH GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED AS PER THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN IN DATE OF HEARING 02.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04.08.2017 2 IT(SS)A NO. 5/DEL/2016 FORM 35. C) HOLDING THAT THE GROUNDS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED WHEREAS AS PER THE APPEAL ORDER THE GROUND: HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDE RED. D) HOLDING AND PRESUMING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOTHIN G TO APPEAL AGAINST THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ALSO TH AT NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED IN KEEPING THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS P ENDING. 2. T HE CIT(A) IN INCORRECT AND WRONG IN HOLDING THAT NOBODY ATTENDE D 02-11- 2010 IN FACT BAJRANG JAIN (ACCOUNTANT)OF THE OFFICE OF THE CA ATTENDED AND WAS TOLD THAT A FRESH NOTICE WOULD BE SENT 23.11.2 010 IN FACT BAJRANG JAIN (ACCOUNTANT) OF THE OFFICE OF THE CA ATTENDED AND W AS TOLD THAT A FRESH NOTICE WOULD BE SENT. 10-03-2011 IN FACT BAJRANG JAIN (ACC OUNTANT ) OF THE OFFICE OF THE CA ATTENDED AND WAS TOLD THAT A FRESH NOTICE WO ULD HE SENT. 17.04.2013 IN FACT BAJRANG JAIN (ACCOUNTANT) OF THE OFFICE OF THE CA ATTENDED AND WAS TOLD THAT A FRESH NOTICE WOULD BE SENT. 03.12.2013 IN FA CT BAJRANG JAIN (ACCOUNTANT) OF THE OFFICE OF THE CA ATTENDED AND W AS TOLD THAT A FRESH NOTICE WOULD BE SENT. ON 18.02.2014 IN FACT BAJRANG JAIN ( ACCOUNTANT) OF THE OFFICE OF THE CA ATTENDED AND WAS TOLD THAT A FRESH NOTICE WOULD BE SENT. O ON 30.10.2015 IN FACT BARJANG JAIN (ACCOUNTATN) OF THE OFFICE OF THE CA ATTENED AND WAS TOLD THAT A FRESH NOTICE WOULD BE SENT. O N THE LAST DATE OF HEARING I.E. ON 11-01- 2016. IN-FACT VISHAL KUMAR (ARTICLE ) OF THE OFFICE OF THE CA ATTENDED WITH ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION; THE CIT(A) WAS NOT IN OFFICE, HER RECORD KEEPER REFUSED TO ADJOURN THE CASE AND DIREC TED TO COME ON THE NEXT DATE I.E. ON 12-01-2016. 3. ON 12-01-16 BAJRANG JAIN (ACCOUNTANT) OF THE OFF ICE OF THE CA WENT TO THE OFFICE OF THE CIT(A) ALSO REFUSED TO CALL HIM IN HI S OFFICE AND REFUSED THE ADJOURNMENT THROUGH HIS RECORD KEEPER. 3. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIGHTLY MADE AN ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME AND REGAR DING JEWELLERY AD DEPOSITS IN POST OFFICE AS WELL AS BANK. THEREFORE , THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HE HAS RIGHTLY AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUN ITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR 3 IT(SS)A NO. 5/DEL/2016 WHICH THE ASSESSEE FAIL TO AVAIL THE OPPORTUNITY BE FORE THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD LD. DR AND PERUSED THE CIT(A) S ORDER DATED 12/1/2016. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS, IT CAN BE SEEN THA T BEFORE THE CIT(A) NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) DEC IDED THE MATTER EX-PARTE WITHOUT GOING INTO MERITS OF THE CASE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THIS MATTER IS REMITTED BACK TO THE CIT(A) FOR DECIDING ALL THE ISSUES ON MERIT. NEEDLESS TO SAY, PROPER HEARING SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04 TH AUGUST, 2017 . SD/- SD/- (R. K. PANDA) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED: 04/08/2017 R. NAHEED * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 4 IT(SS)A NO. 5/DEL/2016 ITAT NEW DELHI DATE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 3/08/2017 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 3/08/2017 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER .2017 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 4.08.2017 PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 4 .08.2017 PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. 5 IT(SS)A NO. 5/DEL/2016