SUMIT GUPTA,NEW DELHI V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-14 , NEW DELHI

ITA 4193/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sumit Gupta against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-26, New Delhi, which upheld the assessment order passed by the ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi. The assessment was made under sections 147 and 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The primary contention in the appeal was the procedural irregularities in the reopening of the assessment and the subsequent additions made to the assessee's income, which included long-term capital gains and unexplained expenditure. The appellant argued that the reopening was mechanical and based on borrowed satisfaction without proper application of mind, and that the CIT(A) had decided the appeal ex-parte despite submissions made via email due to technical issues with the ITBA portal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474607 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAYA CHAUDHARY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Borrowed satisfaction
• Section: 148; 143(3); 142(1); 143(2)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 4193/Del/2024 (Assessment Year : 2017-18) Sumit Gupta C/o. M/s. Raj Kumar & Associates, L-7A, LGF South Extension Part -2, New Delhi -110 049 PAN : ABHPG 7925 N Vs. DCIT Central Circle – 14 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by -None- Respondent by Ms. Jaya Chaudhary, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 29.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement 31.01.2025 O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: 1. The appeal filed by assessee is against the order dated 16.08.2024 of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-26, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] arising out of assessment order dated 20.03.2022 passed by the ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as ‘Ld. AO’) under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] for the Assessment Year 2017- 18. -2- ITA No.4193/Del/2024 Sumit Kumar vs. DCIT A.Y. 2017-18 2. Brief facts of case are that on 30.03.2021 after recording reasons, proceedings under section 147/148 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued. Necessary approval as required under section 151 of the Act was obtained before issuing the notice. In compliance of notice, assessee filed its return of income under section 148 of the Act on 25.04.2021 declaring income of Rs.91,75,810/-. Questionnaire along with notices under section 142(1) and 143(2) were issued from time to time during the course of assessment proceedings. In response to the aforesaid notices, the assessee filed details online which had been considered while framing the assessment order and had been discussed. A notice under section 143(2) r.w.s 147 of the Act dated 28.06.2021 was issued seeking clarification on issues with reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment as recorded during the time of reopening of assessment. Assessee filed objections against reopening in reply dated 13.07.2021. Vide order dated 09.02.2022 the objections filed by assessee against notice under section 148 of the Act were rejected. Notice under section 142(1) of the Act dated 11.02.2022 was issued seeking various documents and information. Assessee through letter dated 26.02.2022 sought extension of time. The assessee vide reply dated 03.03.2022 submitted documents. Assessee filed submission vide letter dated 05.03.2022. Show-cause notice dated 11.03.2022 providing final opportunity of being heard was provided to the assessee. Assessee submitted submissions vide letters dated 14.03.2022 and 17.03.2022. On completion of proceedings, learned Assessing -3- ITA No.4193/Del/2024 Sumit Kumar vs. DCIT A.Y. 2017-18 Officer vide order dated 20.03.2022 made additions of Rs.72,58,183/- and Rs.1,45,164/-. 3. Against the assessment order, assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A) which was dismissed vide order dated 16.08.2024. 4. Being aggrieved, appellant/assessee preferred present appeal with the following grounds: 1. That under the facts and circumstances Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in law as well as on facts in deciding the appeal ex- parte, although Subms. Dtd.08.08.24 and Paper Book Dtd.08.08.24 were filed through Email on 09.08.24 as the ITBA portal was non-functional due to technical glitches and this fact was also mentioned in Subms. Dtd.08.08.24, while uploading the same on email. 2. That under the facts and circumstances, the initiation of re- asstt. proceedings u/s.147/148, being mechanical, initiated on wrong facts on borrowed satisfaction and without application of mind etc. is unsustainable in law as well as on merits. 3. That in the absence of disposing of all the objections against initiation of re-asstt. proceedings, as required in law, the impugned asstt. needs to be quashed. 4. That approval u/s.151 being mechanical, without application of mind and on borrowed satisfaction etc. hence not valid for initiation of re-asstt. proceedings. 5. That under the facts and circumstances, both the lower authorities erred in law as well as on facts in not accepting the genuineness of purchase of shares of M/s Eicher Motors Ltd. and consequentially in not allowing the exemption of Rs.71,35,750/- claimed U/s.10(38) on LTCG on sale of shares of Eicher Motors Ltd. -4- ITA No.4193/Del/2024 Sumit Kumar vs. DCIT A.Y. 2017-18 5.1 That under the facts and circumstances, in the absence of not providing the adverse material, statements and cross- examination etc. in spite of repeated requests, the addition made cannot be sustained. 5.2 That under the facts and circumstances, the lower authorities erred in assuming the LTCG at Rs.72,58,183/-, which is the gross sale consideration on which the LTCG calculates Rs.71,35,750/- after deducting cost of acquisition, consequently addition of Rs. 72,58,183/- is erroneous and excessive. 6. That under the facts and circumstances, addition of Rs.1,45,164/- U/s.69C by assuming the same as unexplained expenditure @2% for obtaining alleged LTCG, is unsustainable and without any basis and material on record.” 5. At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the appellant/assessee. 6. Learned Departmental Representative for the Department submitted that despite various opportunities, the assessee failed to file any reply or submission in support of grounds of appeal. 7. From examination of record in light of above submissions, it is crystal clear that learned CIT(A) vide ex-parte order dated 16.08.2024 upheld the order dated 20.03.2022 of learned AO. In the appellate proceedings, despite six opportunities appellant/assessee neither attended proceedings nor submitted any submission or explanation in support of grounds of appeal. In ground No.1 appellant/assessee has submitted that submission dated 08.08.2024 and paper book dated 08.08.2024 were filed -5- ITA No.4193/Del/2024 Sumit Kumar vs. DCIT A.Y. 2017-18 through E-mail on 09.08.2024 as the ITBA portal was non- functional due to technical glitches. In view of the above material facts and well settled principle of law, in interest of justice, it is considered expedient to restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh decision in accordance with law. 8. In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this day 31st January, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 31.01.2025 Pr i ti Y adav, S r. PS * Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI "