Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . . ITA 270/2012 . . . CIT ..... Appellant . Through Mr. Deepak Chopra, sr. standing counsel with Mr. Harpreet Singh Ajmani, Adv. . . . versus . . . ACA COMMERCE and INSURANCE AGENTS . PVT LTD ..... Respondent . Through . . . CORAM: . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR . . . O R D E R . 24.04.2012 . . . Having heard counsel for the appellant, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Costs of `25,000/- has been imposed on the respondent-assessee for the lapses on their part. . The assessee had filed a return declaring income of `1,00,858/- for the assessment year 2007-08. The notice dated 20.11.2009 does not show that the assessee had not appeared in the earlier proceedings. It is apparent that the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the reply and the documents/explanation furnished by the assessee. In response to the notice dated 20.11.2009, a reply was sent by registered post and was received by Assessing Officer on 5.12.2009. The Assessing Officer did not examine the said reply on the ground that it was not signed by the director of the respondent company but by the accountant. There is a dispute whether or not the assessee or its authorized representative had appeared before the Assessing Officer on 9.12.2009. Thereafter, ex-parte assessment order under Section 144 of the Act was passed on 14.12.2009 making addition of more than `3,12,00,000/-. . 2. In the appeal before CIT (Appeals) the assessee had filed an application under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 but the same was rejected. CIT(Appeals) has mentioned that the Assessing Officer has stated in the remand report that if the additional evidence as filed by the assessee was taken into consideration, the Revenue had no case at all. . 3. Keeping in view the aforesaid position, we do not think any substantial question of law arises for consideration. Of course, in case the assessee does not co-operate, it will be open to the Assessing Officer to proceed in accordance with law. The appeal is dismissed. . SANJIV KHANNA, J . . . . . . . R.V.EASWAR, J . APRIL 24, 2012 . vld . . . $ 1 . . .