Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’ : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the Order dated 24.10.2017 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Meerut relevant to assessment year 2009-10.
The grounds raised in the appeal read as under:-
That no notice u/s. 148 was served upon the assessee, therefore, assessment made by the AO u/s. 144 is bad in law and CIT(A) also in error for confirming the same.
2. That the AO as well as CIT(A) ignored the bank entries of withdrawal made by the assessee, therefore, addition on sale basis of credit entries is not justified at all. Therefore, addition made by AO
and confirmed by CIT(A) of Rs. 21,50,000/- is arbitrary, unjust and not according to law. 3. That the assessee has right to add, delete or modify any grounds during the appeal proceeding.
Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of brevity.
During the hearing, Ld. A.R. of the assessee, has stated that AO has passed the exparte non-speaking order dated 13.12.2016 u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, despite the fact that the notice u/s. 148 of the Act was not served upon the assessee. He has requested that assessee has all the necessary evidences and can produce before the AO, if this Bench give an opportunity to the assessee for producing all the necessary documents before the AO. In this behalf he filed the paper Book containing pages 1 to 35.
On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and opposed the request of the assessee’s counsel request.
I have heard both the parties and perused the records. I have also gone through the order passed by the revenue authorities as well as the contention raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal
. I find force in the arguments of the Ld. Counsel of the assessee that AO has completed the assessment u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide exparte speaking order dated 13.12.2016 and sufficient opportunity was not afforded to the assessee for substantiating his claim. I further find that before the Tribunal the assessee has filed a Paper Book containing pages 1 to 35 in which he has attached the written submission, copy of rely filed before AO u/s. 142(1); photocopy of bank details along with narration; photocopy of the affidavit of Sh. Rajendra Pal, Sh. Rajpal, Sh. Seoraj Singh, Sh. Mahkar, Sh. Sube Singh, Sh. Atar Singh alongwith Khasra and Khatauni; photocopy of remand report; photocopy of rejoinder on remand report; photocopy of ITAt order in the case of ITO, Ward 2(4), Meerut vs. Sh,. Vipin Sirohi in which were filed before the lower authorities and were not properly considered. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the issues in dispute are set aside to the file of the AO to decide the afresh under the law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to file all the necessary documents to substantiate his case and fully cooperate with the AO in the proceedings and did not take any unnecessary adjournment.
7. In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 01-06-2018.