Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 27/08/2010 passed by CIT(A)-XXVII, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2006-07.
The grounds of appeal are as under:-
“1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified by upholding the arbitrary additions made by the Ld.AO which was without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard . 2. Whether the Ld.CIT(A) was justified by upholding the Ld. AO's order based on the Remand Report without even communicating the Remand Report to the appellant.
Without prejudice 3. Whether the Ld.CIT(A) was justified by upholding the Ld. AO's order on account of estimation of GP of Rs.2,82,338/- which is done in an arbitrary and mechanical way even without rejecting the audited books of accounts. 4. Whether the Ld.CIT(A) was justified to uphold disallowance of deduction of interest of Rs.3,92,223/- which was pertaining to the previous year but due to non - payment of TDS in the previous year could not claim and claimed in this year after adhering to the provision of TDS.
5. Whether the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in upholding the additions of capital in nature to the tune of Rs.334000/- and Rs.48800/- just in a mechanical way where the payment was made from bank a/'c and the Bank accounts are already available with Ld.AO .
6. Whether the Ld.CIT(A) was justified to uphold the addition of Rs.800000/- u/s 58 as unexplained cash deposit, just in the mechanical way even without appreciating the evidence on record in the form of bank a/c,audited financial statements, out of total cash sale proceeds of Rs. 1,46,89,256/- 7. Whether the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in upholding disallowance of Rs.6000/- on account of Business Promotion & Staff welfare expenses and Rs.4000/- on account of electricity and water expenses just in an arbitrary and mechanical way.
The appellant craves leave to amend, alter or to raise any other ground at the time of hearing.”
Modification of Ground No.6:
"'Whether the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in upholding not only the addition of Rs. 8 lacs u/s 68 as unexplained cash deposit but also in enhancing the addition by the remaining cash deposits of Rs. 1,38,89,156/-, just in a mechanical way without even appreciating the evidence on record in the form of Bank account, Audited Financial Statements wherein all the cash deposits were the total cash sale proceeds of Rs. 1,46,89,156/- ."
That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or vary from the above facts/ statements at or before the time of hearing.”
The assessment order was passed on 29.12.2018 u/s 144 of the Act, 1961 assessing the total income at Rs.19,55,861/- thereby making various additions/disallowances.
Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The Ld. AR submitted that the assessment order is passed u/s 144 which is an ex-parte order. The Ld. AR further submitted that the CIT(A) though taken the submission of the assessee/authorized representative of the assessee, has not allowed any hearing to the assessee and passed ex-parte order thereby making an enhancement of cash deposits amounting to Rs.1,38,89,156/- without giving proper opportunity to the assessee. The Ld. AR further submitted that the remand report called for by the CIT(A) was never confronted to the assessee.
The Ld. DR submitted that despite giving proper opportunity before the Assessing Officer as well as before the CIT(A), the assessee has not co-operated with the hearing of the assessment proceedings as well as appellate proceedings. In respect of enhancement of the addition u/s 68 the Ld. DR submitted that the same may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. From the perusal of the records it can be seen that neither the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT(A) have given the proper opportunity to the assessee to plead his case. On the contrary, the CIT(A) has enhanced without giving proper notice to the assessee. Therefore, it will be appropriate to remand back the entire issues contested in this appeal to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the case afresh by giving proper opportunity to the assessee by following principle of natural justice. The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
In result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on This 18th Day of November, 2019.