RUPESH BISHNOI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 2(2), MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2483/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 September 2018AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not discussed the assessee's submissions and had passed a non-speaking order. Therefore, the case was set aside to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which sustained the AO's action of applying Section 115BBE. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) passed a non-speaking order without considering their submissions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing a non-speaking order and not considering the assessee's submissions regarding the applicability of Section 115BBE to LTCG income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 115BBE,Section 10(38),Section 112,Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI

Hearing: 17.09.2018Pronounced: 20.09.2018

ORDER

Per N. K. Saini, AM:

1.

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 13.02.2018 of ld. CIT(A), Meerut.

2.

Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Id CIT-A erred in sustaining the action of Id AO in applying section 115BBE which is out rightly bad in law.

2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Id CIT-A erred in not allowing rectification application filed u/s 154 by assessee which was wrongfully rejected by Ld. AO.

3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Id CIT-A erred in not appreciating surrender of exempt LTCG income u/s 10(38) shall be subject matter of section 112 only and cannot be lumped in unexplained income provisions which are not applicable to capital gains transaction.

4. That the appellant craves leave to add add/alter any/all grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

Rupesh Bishnoi 3. During the course of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) passed a non-speaking order and he neither had considered the submissions of the assessee nor given any reason for confirming the action of the AO.

4.

In his rival submissions, the ld. Sr. DR supported the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A).

5.

After considering the submissions of both the parties and the material available on record, it is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) has not discussed the submission of the assessee and simply stated that the assessee is in appeal raising the grounds of appeal as stated in para 2 of the impugned order. However, it is not brought on record as to what were the submissions of the assessee. We, therefore, deem it appropriate to set aside this issue back to the file of the CIT(A) to be decided afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 20/09/2018)

More judgments on Section 115BBE

All 8,662 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115BBE →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →