Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H. S. SIDHU & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM These three appeals are filed by the Assessee against the separate Orders all dated 29.1.2013 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-XI, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2004-05 to 2006-07. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, hence, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake convenience, by dealing with (AY 2004-05).
The grounds raised in 5747/Del/2013 (AY 2004-05) read as under:-
“1. That the impugned assessment order dated 12/12/2011 as passed u/s 144/147 read with section 143(3) of I.T. Act is arbitrary and illegal on various factual and legal grounds.
The Id. CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the action taken by the AO u/s 147 of the I.T. Act. The impugned assessment order deserves to be cancelled/annulled.
2. That the action of the Id. CIT(A) in relying upon the documents collected from Standard Chartered Bank as made by her part of the appellate order as Annexure A (running in 28 pages) without confronting them to the Appellant in the course of appellate proceedings vitiated the impugned appellate order and consequently, the same deserves to be cancelled/annulled.
3. That without prejudice to the above grounds, the addition of Rs.12,07,926/- on account of the alleged deposit in Standard Chartered Bank GK Branch, New Delhi as enhanced by the Ld. CIT(A) to Rs.12,51,766/- is arbitrary and wholly illegal particularly when the appellant had denied to have any account with Standard Chartered Bank.
Various observations made by the authorities below in their respective orders are either incorrect or are untenable.
4. 'That without prejudice to above grounds, the addition if at all could be of peak credit only, which will be far less than the addition made by the Ld. CIT(A).
5. That the total income assessed by giving effect to CIT(A) order and the income tax demand created thereon are arbitrary, unjust and at any rate without prejudice, very excessive.
6. That the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the I.T. Act is illegal and at any rate, without prejudice, very excessive.
7. That the Appellant reserves his right to add, amend/modify the grounds of appeal.
3. The grounds raised in 5748/Del/2013 (AY 2005-06) read as under:-
“1. That the impugned assessment order dated 12/12/2011 as passed u/s 144/147 read with section 143(3) of I.T. Act is arbitrary and illegal on various factual and legal grounds.
The Id. CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the action taken by the AO u/s 147 of the I.T. Act. The impugned assessment order deserves to be cancelled/annulled.
2. That the action of the Id. CIT(A) in relying upon the documents collected from Standard Chartered Bank as made by her part of the appellate order as Annexure A (running in 28 pages) without confronting them to the Appellant in the course of appellate proceedings vitiated the impugned appellate order and consequently, the same deserves to be cancelled/annulled.
3. That without prejudice to the above grounds, the addition of Rs.12,57,931/- on account of the alleged deposit in Standard Chartered Bank GK Branch, New Delhi as enhanced by the Ld. CIT(A) to Rs.13,43,542/- is arbitrary
and wholly illegal particularly when the appellant had denied to have any account with Standard Chartered Bank.
Various observations made by the authorities below in their respective orders are either incorrect or are untenable.
4. 'That without prejudice to above grounds, the addition if at all could be of peak credit only, which will be far less than the addition made by the Ld. CIT(A).
5. That the total income assessed by giving effect to CIT(A) order and the income tax demand created thereon are arbitrary, unjust and at any rate without prejudice, very excessive.
6. That the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the I.T. Act is illegal and at any rate, without prejudice, very excessive.
7. That the Appellant reserves his right to add, amend/modify the grounds of appeal.
4. The grounds raised in 5749/Del/2013 (AY 2006-07) read as under:-
“1. That the impugned assessment order dated 12/12/2011 as passed u/s 144/147 read with section 143(3) of I.T. Act is arbitrary and illegal on various factual and legal grounds.
The Id. CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the action taken by the AO u/s 147 of the I.T. Act. The impugned assessment order deserves to be cancelled/annulled.
2. That the action of the Id. CIT(A) in relying upon the documents collected from Standard Chartered Bank as made by her part of the appellate order as Annexure A (running in 28 pages) without confronting them to the Appellant in the course of appellate proceedings vitiated the impugned appellate order and consequently, the same deserves to be cancelled/annulled.
That without prejudice to the above grounds, the addition of Rs.5,67,419/- on account of the alleged deposit in Standard Chartered Bank GK Branch, New Delhi as enhanced by the Ld. CIT(A) to Rs.6,61,706/- is arbitrary and wholly illegal particularly when the appellant had denied to have any account with Standard Chartered Bank.
Various observations made by the authorities below in their respective orders are either incorrect or are untenable.
'That without prejudice to above grounds, the addition if at all could be of peak credit only, which will be far less than the addition made by the Ld. CIT(A).
5. That the total income assessed by giving effect to CIT(A) order and the income tax demand created thereon are arbitrary, unjust and at any rate without prejudice, very excessive.
That the levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the I.T. Act is illegal and at any rate, without prejudice, very excessive.
That the Appellant reserves his right to add, amend/modify the grounds of appeal.
Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of convenience.
6. At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has stated that Revenue authorities have passed the orders in violation of the principle of natural justice and without giving adequate time and opportunity to the assessee to represent its case and to file its replies and clarifications. He requested that the assessee is having all the necessary evidences which can be produced before the Ld. CIT(A), if this Bench granted an opportunity to the assessee. He filed a small Paper Book containing pages 1 to 33 having the copy of ledger a/c of Standard Chartered Bank showing peak negative cash balance as per the bank statement obtained by the AO directly from the bank for the assessment years 2004-05 to 2006-07; copy of cash book prepared on the basis of above mentioned bank statement obtained by the AO directly from the bank for the following assessment years for the assessment years 2004-05 to 2006-07 and details of total peak negative cash balance and interest income etc. prepared on the basis of the above mentioned bank statement obtained by the AO directly from the bank for the assessment years 2004-05 to 2006-07. He requested that issues in dispute may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration and also assured the Bench that assessee will cooperate with the ld. CIT(A) in the proceedings before him and will not take any unnecessary adjournment in the case.
7. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and strongly opposed the request of the assessee’s counsel for remitting back the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the orders passed by the authorities below and the contention raised by the assessee’s counsel, as aforesaid. We find considerable cogency in assessee’s counsel contention that lower authorities have not given proper opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case as assessee is having all the papers and documents with him which he filed in the shape of Paper Book before us, as aforesaid, needs to be examined at the level of the Ld. CIT(A) afresh alongwith other related documents / evidence. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration, as per law, after considering all the documentary evidences/documents. However, the assessee is directed to fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) during the proceedings before him and not to take any unnecessary adjournment in the case and also produce all the necessary evidences before the Ld. CIT(A) to substantiate his claim.
Following the consistent view as taken in assessment year 2004-05, as aforesaid, the issues involved in the appeals pertaining to AYrs. 2005-06 to 2006-07 also stand remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, under the law, on the similar lines.
In the result, all the 03 Appeals filed by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 03/1/2017.