SANGEETA AGRAWAL L.H OF LATE SH. RAKESH KUMAR AGRAWAL,DELHI V. ACIT, CIRCLE-60(1), NEW DELHI, DELHI

ITA 4668/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Sangeeta Agrawal, the legal heir of Late Sh. Rakesh Kumar Agrawal, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The initial assessment by the A.O. significantly increased the Assessee's declared income, leading to an appeal that was dismissed by the CIT(A). The Assessee's request to admit additional evidence was also dismissed, prompting the current appeal. The Tribunal found that the additional documents could be crucial for a fair assessment and thus remanded the case for a de-novo assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 295066 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Rules, 1962
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAHIL KUMAR BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SOMIL AGGARWAL; SHILPA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 133(6)

Judgement Text

"1 ITA No. 4668/Del/2024 Sangeeta Agrawal L.H Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4668/Del/2024 (A.Y. 2014-15) Sangeeta Agrawal L. H of Late Sh. RakeshKuamr Agrawal, Sangeeta Agrawal L/H of Late Sh. Rakesh Kumar Agrawal, New Delhi PAN: AFIPA6968A Vs. ACIT Circle-60(1) New Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee by Advocate Somil Aggarwal, CA Shilpa Gupta and Advocate Deepesh Garg Revenue by Sh. Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 17/04/2025 Date of Pronouncement 17/04/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’ for short) dated 27/09/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 14/12/2016 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 1,75,80,390/- as against declared income of Rs. 26,56,110/-. 2 ITA No. 4668/Del/2024 Sangeeta Agrawal L.H Vs. ACIT 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 14/12/2016, the Assessee preferred an Appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 27/09/2024, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the Application filed for admission of additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 27/09/2024, the Assessee preferred the present Appeal. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the order impugned of the Ld. CIT(A) has been passed in violation of natural justice, the Assessee has not been provided with opportunity to produce the additional evidence which will go into the roots of the matter and the same is very much essential to determine the issue involved in the Appeal. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal. 5.Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relied on the orders of the Lower Authorities, sought for dismissal of the Appeal filed by the Assessee. 6.We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record.It is found from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) that during the Appellate Proceedings Assessee filed certain additional evidences and the Ld. CIT(A) sought for Remand Report from the A.O.The A.O. opined that the Assessee has failed to establish that it is covered in any of the 3 ITA No. 4668/Del/2024 Sangeeta Agrawal L.H Vs. ACIT limbs of Rule 46A of the Rules. The Assessee has rebutted the version of the A.O. contending that the Assessee was asked to produce certain person in case of whom notices sent u/s 133(6) of the Act on whom the notices either not served or no reply was received. The Assessee submitted that in some cases addresses might have got changed, therefore, he may be allowed some more times to approach those persons and request them appear before the A.O. It was the case of the Assessee that, it is not the duty of the Assessee to produce parties before the A.O. Thus, claimed that reasonable opportunity of being heard was not provided by the A.O. and the additional evidences could not be furnished before the A.O. during the assessment proceedings as the same were in the position of third party. Considering the versions of both the A.O. as well as the Assessee on the application for additional evidence, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the application of the Assessee for admission of additional evidence. 7. In view of the above facts and circumstances, since the documents produced as additional evidence are claim to have the significance in determining the dispute involved in the present case and those documents were not in the position of the Assessee during the assessment proceedings, with an intention to render substantial justice, we remand the matter to the file of the A.O. with a direction to the Assessee to produce all the documents to substantiate her claim of 4 ITA No. 4668/Del/2024 Sangeeta Agrawal L.H Vs. ACIT and the A.O. is also directed to consider those documents in accordance with law and frame the de-novo assessment after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 8. Since we have remanded the matter to the file of the A.O. for framing de-novo assessment, we refrain from making any comment on the merits of the case. Accordingly, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 17th April, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 17.04.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "