Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI
Before: SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI & SHRI KUL BHARAT
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 15.02.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2015-16.
The relevant facts as culled from the material on records are as under :
Assessee is a Private Limited Company who filed its return of income for A.Y. 2014-15 on 24.09.2015 at an income of Rs. Nil. The case was selected for scrutiny under ‘CASS’ and notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee thereafter assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 03.11.2017 and the total income was determined at Rs.61,02,014/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who vide order dated 15.02.2019 in Appeal No.10152/17-18 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee is now in appeal and has raised the following grounds: “
1. That the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is not only bad in law and nature but it also whimsical and liable to be quashed because: a) the assessee was deprived of the legitimate right of making submission during the appellate proceedings against the additions made m the assessment order. b) the Ld.CIT(A) was not considerate to grant the adjournment m spite ol the fact that the AR of the assessee was engaged in other mvetigation cases and at each date of hearing fixed the proper adjournment application was moved and adjournment was granted even on the last date of hearing. The AR of the assessee approached before the Ld. CIT(A) with the submissions but the same were refused to be accepted. c) the Ld. CIT(A) while passing the appellate order did not follow the principle of nature justice.
2. Without prejudice to ground no. 1 supra, that the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in passing the appellate order dated 15.02.2019 without considering the submissions made by the appellant not only through post but a so by email dated 14.02.2019 which was duly served and ignoring all t submissions the Ld. CIT(A) in a mallicious manner passed the order dated 15.02.2019.
3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has also grossly erred in confirming the additions made m assessment order applying the provisions of Rule 11UA of Income Tax Rules, erroneously a s t h e S e c t i o n 56(2)(viib) also envisage the valuation of Shares applying market value of property as well as book value of property. Application of Market Value of Property for share valuation, is nearly the amount of allotment of the shares as well as its premium. Therefore, ignoring the vital provisions of the Act an submissions of the assessee the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded conforming the additions which were made on book value of the property whereas the same were not to be made considering the provision of application of market value of the property also. Therefore, the additions made under section 56(2) (viib) is illegal and liable to be deleted.
The appellant craves leave for addition, modification, alteration, amendment of any of the grounds of appeal.”
4. Before us, at the outset, Learned AR submitted that CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without deciding the issue on merits. He therefore submitted that in the interest of justice one more opportunity be given to the assessee to submit the necessary details and he further assured that assessee will Co- operate by furnishing all the required details.
5. Before us, Learned DR fairly submitted that CIT(A) has not disposed of the appeals of the assessee on merits but however submitted that since there was no appearance by assessee before CIT(A), CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeals of the assessee. He thus supported the order of CIT(A).
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Before us, it is the contention of the Learned AR that the notices issued by the CIT(A) were not served on the assessee and therefore assessee could not comply with the directions. The perusal of CIT(A) order reveals that CIT(A) has passed an ex parte order without deciding the issue on merits. Sub Section (6) of Section 250 of I. T. Act mandate the CIT(A) to state the points in dispute and thereafter assign the reasons in support of his conclusion. We are of the view that by dismissing the appeal without considering the issue on merits, Learned CIT(A) has failed to follow the mandate required in Sub Section (6) of Section 250 of the Act. Further it is also a well settled principle of natural justice that sufficient opportunity of hearing should be offered to the parties and no parties should be condemned unheard. In view of these facts, we set aside the impugned order of CIT(A) dated 15.02.2019 and restore the issue to the file of CIT(A) for re-adjudication of the issues after granting sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to furnish the details called for by the lower authorities. In view of our decision to restore the issue to CIT(A), we are not adjudicating on merits the grounds raised by the assessee. Thus the ground of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 27.04.2022