SHYAM SUNDER JINDAL,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4126/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 September 2019AY 2009-102 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the present case to be similar to the previous adjudication. Therefore, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard and confronting them with relevant documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A) orders for multiple assessment years. The ITAT noted that a similar matter for AY 2006-07 was set aside by a co-ordinate bench due to contradictory observations by the AO regarding information received from Swiss Banking Authority and lack of clarity on document confrontation.

What were the issues?

The validity of the assessment under Section 153A and the AO's contradictory statements regarding the receipt of information from foreign authorities were key issues.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES ‘G’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Amit ShuklaDr. B. R. R. Kumar

Hearing: 28.08.2019Pronounced: 03.09.2019

Heard together (5 matters)

ITA No. 5449/Del/2016
ITA No. 4125/Del/2016
ITA No. 4126/Del/2016
ITA No. 4127/Del/2016
ITA No. 4128/Del/2016

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

ORDER Per Bench: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee against the orders of the ld. CIT(A)-30, New Delhi dated 24.08.2016 and 16.06.2016.

2.

Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record.

3.

We find that similar matter in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2006-07 in stands adjudicated by the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT Delhi wherein it was held that “the Assessing Officer informed the assessee about the copy of bank account obtained under DTA. However, a contradictory observation has been made in para 6 of the assessment order that the requisite ITA No. 5449/Del/2016 2 ITA Nos. 4125 to 4128/Del/2016 Shyam Sunder Jindal information from Swiss Banking Authority had not been received. We, therefore, considering the totality of the facts as discussed hereinabove, set aside the impugned order and restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard and by confronting the assessee with the documents which relates to him. As regards to the legal issue relating to the validity of the assessment u/s 153A of the Act, it is noticed that the assessee in para 2.20 of his written submissions dated 22.08.2016 stated that the search team had confronted the assessee with unauthentic document. In the present case, it is not clear as to whether any authentic document was confronted to the assessee or not. The Assessing Officer also mentioned that a reference was made on 27.11.2012 but it is not clear for which purpose the said reference was made. So in the absence of clear facts on record, this issue is also set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer to be adjudicated afresh, in accordance with law after providing a due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee”. Since, the verbatim of the order, in the present case is also same, and in the absence of any change in the material facts, we hereby remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate afresh, in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

More judgments on Section 153A

All 18,957 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →