RAJKUMAR SHARMA,DELHI V. ITO, WARD 32(5), DELHI

ITA 2587/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Raj Kumar Sharma, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The primary contention was the non-receipt of statutory notices, which the assessee claimed prevented him from complying with the requirements and submitting necessary details. The Assessing Officer had initially assessed the total income at Rs.34,55,085 based on undisclosed income and non-compliance with notices. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the lack of objection from the Revenue, decided to restore the case to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment after proper hearings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 23737 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: PRIYANSH JAIN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Competent authority
• Section: 147; 148; 143(3); 142(1); 139

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2587/DEL/2024 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Raj Kumar Sharma, vs. ITO, Ward 32 (5), 40/1 – 2, Yusuf Sarai, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 016. (PAN : AAZPS6466P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Priyansh Jain, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 12.03.2025 Date of Order : 12.03.2025 O R D E R 1. The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 28.03.2024 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. The assessee has not filed the return of income u/s. 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) for the assessment year under consideration. As per the information available with the AO, the assessee had cash deposits of Rs.5,80,000/- in his bank account, had made credit card payments to the tune of Rs.7,80,000/- and had received Rs.16,46,613/- during the year 2 ITA No.2587/DEL/2024 under consideration. Accordingly, the AO issued notice u/s 148 of the Act on 29.03.2018 after recording reasons and obtaining approval of the competent authority. In compliance to the notice issued u/s 148 of the Act, the assessee filed his return of income on 13.12.2018 declaring income of Rs. 4,43,752/-. Subsequently, notices u/s 142(1) were issued on 16.08.2018, 24.09.2019, 22.10.2018, 31.10.2018, and 13.11.2018 and show cause notice dated 20.11.2018 was issued, however, no compliance was made. As a result of non-compliance, the AO added Rs.7,84,720/- on account of credit card payments, Rs.5,80,000/- on account of cash deposit in his bank account and Rs. 16,46,613/- as undisclosed income/receipts. Accordingly, the AO passed order u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act on 26.12.2018 assessing total income at Rs.34,55,085/-. Aggrieved with the order of Assessing Officer, assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT (A) who partly allowed the appeal. 3. At the time of hearing, ld. AR for the assessee brought to our notice that the assessee has not received statutory notices and as a result thereof, necessary details could not be filed before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, he requested that in the interest of justice, one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to canvass his case before the Assessing Officer by restoring the matter for fresh adjudication before the Assessing Officer. 3 ITA No.2587/DEL/2024 4. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue did not have any objection to the aforesaid proposition. 5. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. I find considerable cogency in the submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee. Accordingly, in my considered view and in the interest of justice, assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard on merit. Therefore, the matter is restored back to the file of Assessing Officer to decide afresh as per law, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the Assessing Officer on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 12th day of March, 2025. Sd/- (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 12.03.2025 TS 4 ITA No.2587/DEL/2024 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals). 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "