SULEKH KUMAR AGGARWAL,DELHI V. ITO, WARD-14(1), DELHI

ITA 804/DEL/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Sulekh Kumar Aggarwal against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, which dismissed his appeal concerning the assessment year 2012-13. The primary contention was the alleged violation of natural justice and improper reopening of the assessment by the Assessing Officer (AO). The AO had reopened the assessment based on unsubstantiated complaints and without proper verification, which the assessee argued was against the principles of natural justice. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal in limine, leading to the current appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal found that despite multiple opportunities provided, the assessee failed to appear or comply with the notices, leading to the decision to remit the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474593 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAHIL KUMAR BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A.K. TANEJA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Reason to believe
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.804/Del/2024 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13) Sulekh Kumar Aggarwal, 214, Harsh Vihar Pitam Pura, Delhi-110034. PAN-ACBPA8835G Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(1), Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri A.K. Taneja, Advocate Department by Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13/02/2025 Date of Pronouncement 13/02/2025 O R D E R PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 22.01.2024 in appeal No. CIT(A), Delhi- 5/10509/2019-20 for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The learned CIT (Appeals) erred in dismissing our appeal as it was against natural justice. He did not pay any heed to our submissions. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in reopening the subject assessment in the utter absence of any reason to believe that income had escaped assessment. 2 ITA No.804/Del/2024 Sulekh Kumar Aggarwal vs. ITO 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in reopening the subject assessment in a mechanical manner, completely relying on here say version of complaints received by him, without any verification or enquiry. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in reopening the subject assessment merely on an unsubstantiated complaint, making observations in the Reasons purely in the nature of suspicion, without evincing any belief. 5. That the LD CIT(A) has not given the proper time for discussing the case which is totally against the natural Justice. It is a settled law that before confirming the demand, proper opportunity of hearing must be afforded to the assesse in order to meet the ends of Natural Justice. After taking into consideration the pleas put forth by the appellant in the reply to show cause notice or at personal hearing, the proper order must have passed. But what the adjudicating authority did in the instant matter is squarely adverse to the legal perspective and amply against the Principle of Natural Justice. The Assesses seeks leave to add to, modify, forego, or otherwise alter all or any of the grounds of appeal as herein-above.” 3. At the outset, the Ld. AR briefly submitted the facts in this case and agreed that Assessing Officer sent several notices, but assessee could not make submission before him, therefore, the AO had proceeded to pass the assessment order u/s 147 /143(3) of the Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short). He further agreed that several opportunities were given by the Ld. CIT(A) as well and assessee could not represent his case due to non-receipt of the notices, however, he submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without deciding the issues on merits. He prayed that this issue may be remitted back to file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 3 ITA No.804/Del/2024 Sulekh Kumar Aggarwal vs. ITO 4. On the other hand, Ld. DR relied on the order of the lower authorities and submitted that assessee has not availed many opportunities given by Assessing Officer as well as Ld. CIT(A). However, he agreed that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is ex-parte order. 5. We have considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. On a perusal of the assessment order and First Appellate Authority order, we find that even though the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) provided opportunity on several occasions, assessee failed to appear nor make compliance to any notices issued. 6. Considering the totality of facts and keeping in view the additions/disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, we are of the opinion that assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, in the interest of justice we are of the view that this matter should go back to the file of the AO for denovo adjudication as no details were filed by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. We also direct the assessee to cooperate in the proceedings before the Assessing Officer without taking unnecessary adjournments. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer shall give adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with above directions. 4 ITA No.804/Del/2024 Sulekh Kumar Aggarwal vs. ITO 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 13/2/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ANUBHAV SHARMA) (MANISH AGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 13/02/2025 PK/Sr. Ps Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW, DELHI "