RAMAKANT U SHARMA HUF,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 32(5), NEW DELHI
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: SMT DIVA SINGH
PER DIVA SINGH, JM
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee wherein the correctness of the order dated 14.02.2019 passed by CIT(A)-11, New Delhi, pertaining to A.Y.2010-11 assessment year is assailed on various grounds of appeal. These reads as under :-
2 ITA No.1780/Del/2019
The Ld. AR inviting attention to the order sheets submitted that
repeatedly the department has been seeking time to bring on record
the documents to support the jurisdictional issue. For the said purpose
attention was invited to the order sheet entries dated 25.10.2012;
27.01.2022, 10.02.2022; 10.05.2022; 11.07.2022 and yet again time
was given on 01.09.2022. Accordingly, it was his submission that a
number of opportunities have been provided to the Revenue to produce
assessment records so as to justify that assumption of jurisdiction was
valid in law. Thus, it was his prayer that the appeal be allowed
quashing the orders.
The Sr. DR agreed that the department has been directed to
3 ITA No.1780/Del/2019
produce the assessment records. It was submitted that he has filed a
reply received from the Assessing Officer on email dated 20.10.2022
wherein it is informed that the assessment record for the specific period
has not been located. For ready reference letter received and made
available is extracted here under :-
4 ITA No.1780/Del/2019
Accordingly, he pleaded his inability to meet the jurisdictional
challenge as the relevant information from the field was not traceable.
The Ld. AR inviting attention to the impugned order submitted
that before the First Appellate Authority the assessee has specifically
raised specific arguments alleging that till date the Assessing Officer
has never supplied the assessee reasons for reopening assessment.
5.1 For ready reference the relevant extract from page-4 of the
impugned order was relied upon to emphasize the number of times the
issue had been agitated. The submissions of the assessee extracted
in the order, it was argued, would show that the assessee had also
requested the First Appellate Authority to provide the reasons
recorded. Despite repeated request to the Assessing Officer agitated
before the CIT(A) also, the reasons till date have not been provided for
reopening the assessment. Infact, it was argued that the AO had never
recorded the reasons for reopening. It is seen that the said objection
though extracted in the order has not been addressed by the First
Appellate Authority. It has been argued that number of opportunities
have been given by the Coordinate Benches right from 25.10.2021
onwards. The facts on record and the reply of the AO, it was argued,
5 ITA No.1780/Del/2019
shows that reasons for reopening in fact were never recorded.
Accordingly, considering the reply made available by the Revenue, it
was his prayer that the orders be quashed.
The Sr. DR relies on the order.
I have heard submissions and gone through material available on
record. Considering the departmental reply made available read
alongwith number of opportunities provided to the Revenue to
substantiate what reasons were recorded and whether it was made
available to the assessee, I find that in the face of the reply available,
the reasons recorded are not available with the Revenue. Hence, in
the light of the specific submissions extracted in the order alleging non
providing of the reasons for reopening and lack of filing the same
before the ITAT, the absence of finding on the issues by the First
Appellate Authority gives rise to concerns that possibly reasons for re-
opening were never recorded. Accordingly, I am convinced that the
jurisdiction has been assumed in the peculiar facts of the present case
is without following the mandatory procedures. Without demonstrating
the availability of the reasons recorded for the reopening on record,
the assumption of jurisdiction and exercise of power in violation of the
settled legal jurisprudence cannot be sustained. The orders are
6 ITA No.1780/Del/2019
accordingly quashed. Said announcement was made in the Open Court
at the time of hearing.
Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Said order was pronounced in the open court on 31st October,
2022.
Sd/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER *NEHA, Sr. Private Secretary* Poonam/CHD Date:- 31 .10.2022 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI
