SUMAN SHARMA,PATPARGANJ V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 58(3), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

ITA 2174/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Suman Sharma against the order of the NFAC, Delhi-4 dated 31.01.2025 for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The primary grievances included the assumption of jurisdiction by the jurisdictional assessing officer instead of the faceless assessing officer, the ex-parte nature of the assessment, erroneous computation of short term capital gain on immovable property, arbitrary addition of income under section 69 of the Act, and excessive tax demand. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given a proper opportunity to be heard, which warranted a remand to the CIT(A) for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 774526 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 01-04-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JITENDER SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: SHIVAM MALIK
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 148; 69; 234B; 6

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2174/DEL/2025 [A.Y 2016-17] Suman Sharma Vs. The I.T.O Flat No. 73, Plot No 106 Ward – 58(3) SRM Apartments, New Delhi I.P. Extn Patparganj, Delhi PAN: ALIPS 6268 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Shivam Malik, CA Department By : Shri Jitender Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 26.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, AM :- This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi-4 dated 31.01.2025 pertaining to A.Y 2016-17. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2174 /DEL/2025 Suman Sharma Vs ITO [A.Y 2021-22] Page 2 of 5 2. At the very outset the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted his grievances vide grounds of appeal which read as under: “1. That the assumption of jurisdiction by the jurisdictional assessing officer instead of the faceless assessing officer in issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act would render the reassessment proceedings non-est and bad in law. 2. That the ex-parte nature of the assessment order as well as the impugned order, solely due to the negligence of the concerned professional, ought not to detriment the appellant, without a fair and adequate opportunity of hearing. 3. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer has erred in computing the short term capital gain of the immovable property by treating the entire sale consideration as the short term capital gain, which is bad in law. 4. That the addition of Rs. 59,25,000/- to the income of the 4 appellant under section 69 of the Act on account of purchase of an immovable property is arbitrary and illegal. 5. That the total income determined at Rs. 87,44,400/- and the consequent tax demand of Rs. 70,60,830/- is arbitrary, unjust and at any rate excessive. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2174 /DEL/2025 Suman Sharma Vs ITO [A.Y 2021-22] Page 3 of 5 6. That the appellant denies liability to pay interest under sections 6 234A and 234B amounting to Rs. 21,68,662/- and Rs. 23,70,398/- respectively. 7. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any ground during the course of the proceedings” 3. Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 4. A perusal of the above grounds of appeal reveal that the main argument of the ld. counsel for the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) has not afforded reasonable opportunity of being heard by not serving proper notice to assessee. Having heard the rival submissions, we are of the considered view that both the Assessing Officer and the first appellate authority ought to have given a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to restore the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and considering the evidences/material furnished by the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the proceedings and furnish documents/evidence as required by the Assessing Officer. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2174 /DEL/2025 Suman Sharma Vs ITO [A.Y 2021-22] Page 4 of 5 4. In the result, appeal of assessee in ITA No. 2174/DEL/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 26.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] [NAVEEN CHANDRA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 09th SEPTEMBER, 2025. VL/ Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) Asst. Registrar, 5. DR ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2174 /DEL/2025 Suman Sharma Vs ITO [A.Y 2021-22] Page 5 of 5 Sl No. PARTICULARS DATES 1. Date of dictation of Tribunal Order 2. Date on which the typed draft order is placed before the Dictating Member 3. Date on which the typed draft order is placed before the other Member [in case of DB] 4. Date on which the approved draft order comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S. 5. Date on which the fair Order is placed before the Dictating Member for sign 6. Date on which the fair order is placed before the other Member for sign [in case of DB] 7. Date on which the Order comes back to the Sr. P.S./P.S for uploading on ITAT website 8. Date of uploading, inf not, reason for not uploading 9. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 10. Date on which the file goes for Xerox 11. Date on which the file goes for endorsement 12. The date on which the file goes to the Superintendent for checking 13. Date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 14. Date on which the file goes to the dispatch section for dispatch the Tribunal order 15. Date of Dispatch of the Order 16. Date on which the file goes to the Record Room after dispatch the order Printed from counselvise.com "