SHRI GAURAV MALHOTRA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 128/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 June 2016AY 2008-094 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that both the assessment order and the CIT(A)'s order were passed ex parte. Citing the principle of 'audi alteram partem', the Tribunal decided to remand the case back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer passed an ex parte assessment order, and the CIT(A) also dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte, confirming the additions made. The assessee claimed that documentary evidence was filed supporting share transactions and a deduction under Section 80C.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte orders passed by the lower authorities were justified, and if the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80C,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES: “SMC-1” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI N.K.SAINI, A.M.

For Appellant: Shri C.S.Anand, Adv

This is an appeal filed by the Assessee directed against the order dated 16.12.2013 of Ld.CIT(A)-XVIII, New Delhi pertaining to the Assessment year (A.Y.) 2008-09 on the following grounds.

“1.1 The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) is arbitrary, against law and facts on record. 1.2 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) has erred in confirming the addition made by the Assessing officer who has passed the order without going through the details as well as documentary evidence filed during the course of assessment proceeding and without giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

ITA 128/Del/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 Sh. Gaurav Malhotra vs. ITO, N.Del. 1.3 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax has erred in dismissing the appeal without going through the fact that the share transaction of Rs 1,70,000/- is part of books of accounts of the assessee and deduction of Rs 20,000/- claimed u/s 80C is substantiated with the documentary evidence. 1.4 The appellant may be permitted to add, alter or amend any of the foregoing grounds of appeal.”

2. From the above grounds it is gathered that the grievance of the assessee relates to the ex parte order passed by the Ld.CIT(Appeals) and confirming the addition of Rs.1,70,000/- and not granting the deduction amounting to Rs.20,000/- u/s 80C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

3.

The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed a return of income on 22.4.2008 declaring an income of Rs.1,18,960/-. However the assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) at an income of Rs.2,98,460/- by passing the ex parte order dt. 24.12.2010 u/s 144 of the Act.

3.1. Against the said order the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal ex parte and confirmed the additions made by the A.O.

3.2. Now the assessee is in appeal before me.

4.

The Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that neither the A.O. nor the Ld.CIT(A) appreciated the facts in right perspective even when all the relevant material was placed on record in support of the claim related to share transactions of Rs.1,70,000/-, which has been added by the A.O. and in support of the claim for deduction u/s 80C of the Act for a sum of Rs.20,000/-. He requested to remand the case back to the file of the A.O. for proper verification and adjudication.

ITA 128/Del/2014 A.Y. 2008-09 Sh. Gaurav Malhotra vs. ITO, N.Del.

5.

In his rival submissions the Ld.D.R. supported the order of the authorities below and further submitted that the assessee did not cooperate and appeared neither before the A.O. nor before the Ld.CIT(A), therefore, there was no other alternative except to pass the respective orders ex parte.

6.

I have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on record. In the present case it is an admitted fact that the assessment order by the A.O. as well as the impugned order by the Ld.CIT(A) have been passed ex parte. It is well settled that nobody should be condemned as unheard as per the maxim “audi alteram partem”. I therefore deem it appropriate to remand this case back to the file of the A.O. to be adjudicated afresh, after affording due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to cooperate and not to seek undue or unwarranted adjournments.

7.

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 13th June, 2016.

More judgments on Section 80C

All 658 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →