SONIA KAPOOR,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-3(4), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4313/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 January 2019AY 2008-093 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had decided the appeal ex parte without proper notice and on merits. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's case was reopened based on alleged bogus receipts from share sales. The Assessing Officer made an addition for short-term capital gains despite the assessee's denial of share transactions.

What were the issues?

The primary issues were the validity of reopening the assessment and the addition of short-term capital gains, with a procedural issue regarding ex parte assessment by the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA

For Appellant: Shri Virender Chauhan, CA
For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the impugned order dated 31.01.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I, NOIDA for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.143(3) of the IT Act, for the Assessment Year 2008-09. The assessee is mainly aggrieved by order of the ld. CIT(A) which has been ex parte without deciding the issues on merit and has also challenged the addition of Rs.26,83,750/- on account of Short-Term Capital Gain.

2.

Before us, learned counsel submitted that, here in this case the assessee’s case was reopened vide notice dated 31.03.2015 issued u/s.148, on the ground that assessee had received bogus receipt on sale of shares.

During the course of assessment proceedings, assessee has categorically denied any kind of sale of shares of M/s. Rutron International Ltd. However, the Assessing Officer without any material on record to rebut assessee’s categorical denial, has assessed short-term capital gains in the hands of the assessee and also charged the interest.

3.

Ld. CIT(A) has decide the appeal ex parte without even proper service of notice. Accordingly, he submitted that matter should be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided a fresh.

4.

On the other hand, learned Department Representative too admitted that matter can be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding the issues afresh.

5.

In view of the fact that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal ex parte for want of prosecution, therefore, in the interest of justice, I set aside the impugned order and remand back the entire issues back to the file of the ld. CIT(A), who shall decide the issue afresh after serving proper notice of hearing, not only the validity of reopening u/s.147/148 and validity of service of notice by Assessing Officer but also addition of Rs.26,83750/- on account of Short Term Capital Gain on merits after considering the assessee’s contention. Needless to say, the ld. CIT(A) shall give due and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee to represent her case.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28th January, 2019.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →