PREM PARKASH,PANIPAT vs. ITO, PANIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1528/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 September 2016AY 2010-112 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the AO and producing evidence. Therefore, the issue was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. The AO made an addition due to the assessee's non-cooperation, and the CIT(A) rejected the assessee's application for additional evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from cooperating with the AO and producing evidence, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-3’, NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri K.C.Aneja, Adv

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-3’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sh. Prem Prakash vs. ITO, Ward 3 S/o Sh Balraj Singh Panipat C/o Bal Bhawan Hali Park Panipat PAN: AOCPP 1515 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri K.C.Aneja, Adv. Respondent by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr.D.R. O R D E R

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue directed against the order of the Ld.CIT(A), Karnal dated 20.03.2014 pertaining to the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2010-11.

2.

After hearing rival contentions I find that the A.O. has made the addition, because of non cooperation by the assessee. The First Appellate Authority has also rejected the application of the assessee for admission of additional evidence for the reasons given therein.

3.

On perusing the papers on record, orders of the authorities below as well as case laws cited, I am of the considered opinion that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the A.O. and producing the necessary evidences. In the interest of justice, I am of the considered view that the issue should be restored to the file of the A.O. for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the A.O. in the set aside assessment proceedings.

4.

In the result the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 21st September, 2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →