AKHILESH ARORA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 43(3), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8230/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 July 2021AY 2011-125 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(A) to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate their claim. The assessee is directed to appear and present their case without seeking adjournments.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file a return of income for AY 2011-12. The AO reopened the assessment based on AIR information of a bank deposit and made an ex-parte addition. The CIT(A) also passed an ex-parte order confirming the addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment and appellate orders are sustainable when the assessee was not provided with adequate opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA

Hearing: 15.07.2021Pronounced: 15.07.2021

ORDER This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the ex-parte Order dated 17.07.2019 of the Ld. CIT(A)-15, Delhi, relevant to the A.Y. 2011-2012.

2.

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition made by the A.O. on account of bank deposit and determining the 2 ITA.No.8230/Del./2019 Shri Akhilesh Arora, New Delhi. total income at Rs.15,14,929/- as no return of income has been filed by the assessee.

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite service of notice. Therefore, this appeal is being decided on the basis of material available on record and after hearing the Ld. D.R.

4.

The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed return of income for the assessment year under appeal. An information has been received by the A.O. through AIR that an amount of Rs.14,24,000/- has been deposited in the bank account of the assessee, but, no return of income has been filed by him. Therefore, the A.O. reopened the assessment under section 147/148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 after taking necessary approval from the Competent Authority. The A.O. issued statutory notices under section 148 of the I.T. Act which were duly served by speed post. Further notices under section 142(1) Dated 11.06.2018, 18.08.2018, 08.10.2018 and 15.11.2018 were also issued to the assessee to file return of income for the assessment year under 3 ITA.No.8230/Del./2019 Shri Akhilesh Arora, New Delhi. consideration and to make compliance of the queries raised in the notices with documentary evidences. However, no compliance have been made to the said notices by the assessee. Therefore, the A.O. had no option, but, to pass ex- parte assessment order under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the I.T. Act, Dated 11.12.2018, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.15,14,929/-.

5.

Aggrieved by the assessment Order of the A.O., the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Even before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not respond to the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(A) under section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961 Dated 16.04.2019 and the assessee requested for adjournment to 12.06.2019, 20.06.2019 and 08.07.2019 which were granted by the Ld. CIT(A) as sought for by the assessee. However, since, there were no compliance either to the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(A) or to the adjournments granted to the assessee as per his convenience, the Ld. CIT(A) was left with no option except to pass ex-parte Order by following the Judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late

1.

4 ITA.No.8230/Del./2019 Shri Akhilesh Arora, New Delhi. Tukojirao Holkar vs., CWT [1997] 223 ITR 480 [MP], duly confirming the addition made by the A.O. at Rs.15,14,929/- .

6.

Aggrieved by the Order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. None appeared on behalf of the Assessee.

7.

I have heard the Ld. D.R. and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that despite opportunities granted by the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not appear before either of the Authorities, for which, ex-parte Orders have been passed by the A.O. and the Ld. CIT(A).

7.1. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his claim and decide the issue as per fact and Law. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and substantiate his case

5 ITA.No.8230/Del./2019 Shri Akhilesh Arora, New Delhi. without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which, the Ld. CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate orders as per Law. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

8.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court at the time of hearing itself i.e., on 15.07.2021.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →