BHARTI SHOKEEN,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5079/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 August 2019AY 2009-104 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without dealing with the matter on merits, it was appropriate to remand the case back to the CIT(A). The assessee should be given a proper hearing and an opportunity to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte. The Assessing Officer had made additions on account of long-term capital gains from agricultural land and interest income. The assessee sought a remand back to the CIT(A) on the grounds that a similar issue for a relative was remanded by the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without deciding the issues on merit. Whether the case should be remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Respondent: Smt. Rinku Singh, Sr.DR
Hearing: 01.08.2019Pronounced: 02.08.2019

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 21.07.2016 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2009-10.

2.

The grounds of appeal are as under:

1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the case and in the law, the CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the addition as made by the Assessing Officer (“AO ) on account of long term capital gain from sale of agricultural land of Rs. 4,54,78,190/-.

2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in the law, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition on account of interest income of Rs. 1,57,606/-. That the appellant craves leave to add to and / or Amend, modify or withdraw the grounds outlined above before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

3.

The Assessee filed Return of income for the A.Y. 2009-2010 on 18.03.2015. Subsequently, in accordance with the statutory requirement, physical copy of the said income tax return along with audited accounts of the company, statement of income, copies evidencing payment of chargeable taxes duly paid were submitted along with all other necessary details & documents as desired by the Assessing Officer from time to time, during the course of assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer. The Assessment Order was passed by the Assessing Officer on 23.03.2015 u/s 143/148 of the Income Tax Act which was received by the assessee on 26.03.2015. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 4,54,78,190/- being the amount of Long term capital gain on sale of agriculture land and Rs. 1,57,608/- as Interest Income, thereby total income was assessed at Rs. 4,62,04,003/-.

4.

Being aggrieved by the assessment order the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismiss the appeal of the assessee.

5.

The Ld. AR submitted that the relative / sister of the assessee has been granted similar benefit by the Tribunal on the same issue and the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) as the order is ex-parte. Therefore, the Ld.AR requested that this matter also be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A).

6.

The Ld. DR did not have any objection as the order passed by the CIT(A) is ex-parte.

7.

We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. Since the CIT(A) has not dealt the matter on merit and passed ex-parte order, it will be appropriate to remand back this matter to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issues involved herein on merit and after giving proper hearing to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principle of natural justice. The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

8.

In result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →