MRS. ANU GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3376/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 September 2016AY 2010-113 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found no error in the order of the CIT(Appeals) after carefully perusing the order and the grounds of appeal. The CIT(Appeals) had adjudicated all grounds judiciously.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(Appeals) order. The notice of hearing sent to the assessee was returned unserved due to an incorrect address. The revenue was heard ex parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) order was justified and whether the disallowance of interest and subsequent additions were correct.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH : SMC-II, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV

For Respondent: Shri S.K. Jain, Sr. DR
Hearing: 14.09.2016Pronounced: 16.09.2016

Date of hearing : 14.09.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 16.09.2016 O R D E R This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order of the CIT(Appeals)-17, New Delhi dated 25.02.2015 inter alia on the following grounds:- “

1. That the judgment is against the facts & law of the case.

2. That the learned assessing officer wrongly disallowed the interest of Rs.3,04,441/- paid to M/s Tata Capital Ltd and M/s Reliance Capitals Ltd and confirmed by the Hon. CIT(Appeals).

3. That the learned CIT Appeals has wrongly added Rs.4,31,855/- on account of disallowance of interest whereas the same was allowed by the Ld.AO.

4.

That the appellant prays to leave, add or otherwise amend any or all grounds of appeal

before or after the hearing of the appeal.

5. That the appellant prays to delete the additions as per the order of the LD. A. A. which is based on unjustified and baseless grounds.”

2.

This appeal was taken up for consideration on 14.09.2016, but none appeared on behalf of the assessee. On perusal of the record, it is noticed that the notice of hearing was sent through RPAD, but the same was received back unserved with the remarks “addressee is not available”. Notice was issued to the address given in Form 36 filed along with the appeal. Since the office could not serve the notice upon the assessee due to incorrect address, I have no option but to hear the appeal ex parte. The revenue was heard.

3.

On a careful perusal of the order of CIT(Appeals) vis-à-vis the grounds raised

before the Tribunal, I find that the CIT(A) has adjudicated all the grounds raised before him judiciously and I find no error in the order of the CIT(A). Accordingly, I confirm the same.

4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Pronounced in the open court on this 16th day of September, 2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →