SWARAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-22(4), NEW DELHI

ORDER This appeal is filed by assessee against the Order dated 28.09.2018 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-31, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2009-10 on the following grounds:-

1. That the impugned order passed u/s 250 by the CIT(A) is invalid and is liable to be set aside because no reasonable opportunity of being heard was given to the assessee and is against the principle of natural justice.

2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts in upholding the validity of reopening of the assessment u/s 147/148 of the I.T Act.

3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts in upholding the validity of the impugned assessment order which is without complying with the mandatory

conditions of Section 147 to 153 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, therefore reopening of the assessment is bad in law and may please be annulled.

4(i)That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 40,00,000/- made on account of unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of I.T. Act, 1961 being amount received from M/s Mani Mala Delhi Properties Pvt. Ltd., M/s Euro Asia Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Lotus Realcon Pvt Ltd on account of Share subscription money. In this regard, all of his observations are wrong, incorrect and against the facts of the case and material on record.

(ii) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred both on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 72,000/- u/s 69C of the I.T. Act, 1961 being amount alleged as paid for obtaining accommodation entries. In this regard, all of his observations are wrong, incorrect and against the facts of the case and material on record.

(iii) That the aforesaid additions have been made without bringing on record any material or evidence to prove the allegation of the AO and are contrary to the material on record, and are based on conjecture and surmises.

5. That the impugned assessment order passed by the learned Assessing Officer has erred both on facts and law in making an assessment at income of Rs. 40,97,600/- against income of Rs. 25,600/- declared by the assessee.

2. At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that assessee filed application before the Ld. CIT(A) for adjournment which was wrongly rejected by the Ld. CIT(A) and decided the issue in dispute against the assessee without hearing the Ld. AR of the assessee. To support his contention, he draw my attention towards page no. 13 of the impugned order which is a copy of application filed by the assessee for seeking adjournment and the finding at page no. 14 of the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) for rejecting the request of the assessee for adjournment and decided the case of the assessee on the basis of material available on record. Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested that the issue in dispute may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, as per law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.