BALWAN SINGH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 44(4), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2641/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 May 2020AY 2012-134 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal as the assessee did not appear before the Tribunal, similar to their non-appearance before the CIT(A). This conduct indicated a lack of interest in pursuing the matter.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment for AY 2012-13 was reopened, and an addition of Rs. 13,81,000 was made on account of unexplained cash deposits. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition after the assessee failed to appear despite multiple notices.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were the validity of the reassessment proceedings and the confirmation of the addition for unexplained cash deposits due to the assessee's non-appearance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 151,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘I(2

Before: MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

Hearing: 05.03.2020

ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 17/12/2018 passed by CIT(A)-15, New Delhi, for Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

The grounds of appeal

are as under:- “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Id. AO has erred in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. The action of the Id. AO is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the reassessment proceedings being illegal and without jurisdiction.

2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Id. AO, has erred in issuing notice u/s 148 of Income Tax Act, 1961 without obtaining proper sanction u/s 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action of the Id. AO is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the reassessment proceedings being illegal and without jurisdiction.

3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 13,81,000 made by Id. AO on account of unexplained cash deposits u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action of the Id. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the said addition of Rs. 13,81,000.”

3. The assessee had filed its return of income for AY 2012-13, declaring income of Rs. 1,74,530/- case was taken up for scrutiny and assessment u/s 147/143(3) of the Act was completed by the Assessing Officer on 30.03.2015, determining assessed income at Rs. 15,55,530/- on account of cash deposit in the bank account u/s 68 the Income Tax Act, 1961. The additions were confirmed in the first appeal vide order dated 22.11.2016. Thereafter, the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide its order dated 12.05.2017 in has remitted back the matter to the file of the CIT (A) with a direction in para 5 of their order to give one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case.

4. The CIT(A) vide order dated 17/12/2018 dismissed the appeal on the ground that despite giving 7 notices, the assessee or his representative has not appeared before the CIT(A) and confirmed the assessment order.

5.

Being aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee filed present appeal before us. But at the time of hearing none appeared before us on behalf of the assessee. The assessee was also absent. From the perusal of records it can be seen that the notice was duly served upon the assessee. It is pertinent to note that the non-cooperation of the assessee before the CIT (A) without any reason was not justifiable before us as well and the conduct of non appearance before us also shows that the assessee is not at all interested in contesting the present matter. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

6.

In result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on this 04th Day of May, 2020.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →