M/S. PACKRAFT CONTAINER INDIA (P) LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6647/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 December 2018AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the issue back to the CIT(A) to decide the matters on merits after providing the assessee with a proper opportunity of being heard. The assessee was directed to appear and furnish necessary details.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) concerning additions made to its total income. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) during the original proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by not providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and whether the additions made were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 194J(1)(a),Section 194C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI N.S. SAINI & SHRI SMT. BEENA A PILLAI

For Respondent: Shri Shailesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 11/12/2018Pronounced: 12/12/2018

(Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department by : Shri Shailesh Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 11/12/2018 Date of Pronouncement: 12/12/2018 ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER present appeal has been filed by assessee against order dated 18/09/15 passed by Ld. CIT (A) Faridabad is on following grounds of appeal:

Grounds of appeal:

1. “On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(Appeal) is unjustified, arbitrary and has erred under the law by not deleting the following additions made by the Assessing Authority: a) By making an addition of Rs. 1,88,711/- to the total income u/s 40(a)(ia) read with Section 194J(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act. b) By making an addition of Rs. 6,48,365/- to the total income u/s 40(a)(ia) read with Section 194C of the Income Tax Act.

c) By making a lumpsum addition of Rs. 1,70,000/- to the total income on account of Exhibition Expenses. d) By making an addition of Rs. 3,01,345/- to the total income on account of Travelling Expenses. e) By ignoring the principle of natural justice and not providing the reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. And it is therefore, prayed that the unjustified and arbitrary additions to income be deleted and relief accordingly be granted to the assessee.

2.

That the appellant craves for the permission to add, delete or amend the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of appeal.”

On perusal of impugned order it is observed that none has appeared before Ld. CIT (A). In the interest of Justice we deem it fit and proper to set aside this issue back to the file of Ld. CIT (A) to decide issues on merits after giving proper opportunity of being heard to assessee as per law. Needless to say that assessee shall appeared before Ld. CIT (A) on the date of notice and file all requisite details as called for in respect of its claim. Accordingly grounds raised by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 12/12/2018 Sd/- Sd/- (N.S. SAINI) (BEENA A PILLAI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dt. 12/12/2018 *Kavita Arora

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →