Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA
[A] This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order dated 29.12.2016 passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, New Delhi, [in short, “Ld.CIT(A)”] pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
“1. That the order passed by the Learned CIT (A) is not based on the facts & circumstances of the case. 2. That the order passed by the Learned CIT(A) is against the principles of natural justice.
ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi.
That on the facts & circumstances of the case the Learned CIT (A) was not justified in addition of Rs. 30,93,152/- on account of points mentioned in the assessment order.
That the addition of Rs. 19,00,000/- on account of unsecured loan made by the Learned CIT(A) is not based on the correct appreciation of the facts.
That the addition of Rs. 11,93,152/- on account of Form 26 AS made by the Learned Assessing Officer is not based on the correct appreciation of the facts. In this point, third party confirmation received after the order passed by the CIT(A).
That on the facts & circumstances of the case the Learned AO has erred in charging interest u/s 234B and 234C.
That on the facts & circumstances of the case Learned Assessing Officer has erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) read with Section 274 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
That your appellant craves your leave to set aside or withdraw any or all grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of the appeal.”
[B] Vide Assessment Order dated 30.03.2015 passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the I.T. Act”). The relevant portion of the Assessment Order dated 30.03.2015 is reproduced as under:-
ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi.
ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. [C] The Assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Vide impugned appellate order dated 29.12.2016, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee’s appeal. The relevant portion of the order dated 29.12.2016 of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under:
ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi.
”
[D] This present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 29.12.2016 of the Ld. CIT(A). At the time of hearing, Revenue was represented by Shri Surender Pal, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (“Ld. Sr. DR”, for short). However, none was present from the assessee’s side. In the absence of any representation from assessee’s side, at the time of hearing before us, we heard the Ld. Sr. DR; who relied upon the order dated 30.03.2015 of the Assessing Officer and the aforesaid impugned order dated 29.12.2016 of the Ld. CIT(A). After perusal of the materials on record, including the ITA No.- 876/Del/2012 Shri Rajesh Passi. order of the AO and the aforesaid impugned order dated 29.12.2016 of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed speaking order on merits. Relevant portion of the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) has already been reproduced in foregoing paragraph [C] of this order. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has given detailed reasons for his decision on merits in the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 29.12.2016 of Ld. CIT(A). During appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (“ITAT”, for short) no material has been brought for our consideration to persuade us to take a view different from the view taken by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order on merit. After hearing the Ld. Sr. DR and after perusal of materials on record, and further, in view of the foregoing discussion, we decline to interfere with the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 29.12.2016 of Ld. CIT(A), and accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.
[E] Before we part; we explicitly clarify that the assessee will be at liberty to approach ITAT for restoration of the appeal in accordance with Proviso to Rule 24 of Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal), Rules, 1963. If the assessee does approach ITAT for restoration of the appeals in ITAT, the matter will be considered in accordance with law having regard to the facts and circumstances.
[F] In the result, appeal filed by Assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 10/12/2019.