SANJAY GHAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1,

We have heard Ld. Representatives of both the parties and perused the material on record.

Ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that earlier both the appeals of the assessee were allowed by ITAT ‘F’ Bench, Delhi vide order dated , 1806/Del/2006 Shri Sanjay Ghai vs. DCIT 13th July, 2007. He has submitted that the appeals were decided in favour of the assessee because the Assessing Officer failed to record satisfaction in the order of the assessment regarding concealment before initiating penalty proceedings. He has submitted that revenue department preferred appeal against the order of the Tribunal before High Court and the Hon'ble High Court set aside the order of the Tribunal and allowed the appeals of the revenue. He has submitted that assessee preferred civil appeal No. 11177-11178 of 2013 before Hon’ble Supreme Court and appeals of the assessee have been decided vide judgment dated 17th December, 20113. He has submitted that assessee made a prayer before Hon'ble Supreme Court that in the event while setting aside the order of Tribunal, the High Court should have referred the matter back to the Tribunal to decide the appeal of the assessee on merits. Hon'ble Supreme Court modified the order of the High Court to the effect that the matter shall be remitted to the Tribunal for the purpose of deciding the same on merit. The issue with regard to the satisfaction stands foreclosed. The appeals of the assessee were accordingly allowed.

In view of the above judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, both the appeals have been re-fixed for hearing afresh on merits.

Ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that though the assessee did not file appeal before Ld. CIT(A) against the assessment order whereby additions were made in both the assessment years but there is no evidence on record to prove any concealment of income or furnishing of , 1806/Del/2006 Shri Sanjay Ghai vs. DCIT inaccurate particulars of income. He has submitted that in assessment year 2000-01 the Assessing Officer made the addition on which penalty was levied with regard to the sale price mentioned in the sale deed and market value of the shop on which stamp duty paid / circle rate. He has submitted that there is no evidence on record to prove if assessee received any amount over and above recorded in the sale deed. In assessment year 1997-98, the Assessing Officer made certain additions on account of disallowance of the expenses. He has further submitted that penalty has been imposed for filing of inaccurate particulars of income. However nothing is explained in the notice as to for which limb penalty has been imposed. He has filed copy of the show cause notice for one year only and submitted that it being an old matter certain records are not available at present. Ld. Counsel for assessee very fairly submitted that both the appeals of the assessee have been decided by Ld. CIT(A) ex parte because there was no representation from the side of the assessee before him. He has therefore submitted that since the merits of the claim of assessee have not been adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned orders, therefore, matters may be remanded to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with direction to re -decide both the appeals of the assessee on merits and assessee may be given liberty to make all legal and factual submissions before Ld. CIT(A). Ld. DR in view of the above also stated that since Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee ex parte , therefore matters may be remanded to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. , 1806/Del/2006 Shri Sanjay Ghai vs. DCIT

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of submissions of the Ld. Representatives of both the parties, we are of the view the matter requires reconsideration before Ld. CIT(A) for deciding both the appeals of assessee on merits. Whatever contentions have been raised by Ld. Counsel for assessee on merits as well as on legal issues were not raised before Ld. CIT(A). The orders of Ld. CIT(A) have not discussed merits of case and no reasons for decision have been mentioned. Therefore, Ld. Counsel for assessee and Ld. DR have rightly contended that both the matters may be remanded to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. In this view of the matter, we set aside the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) Dehradun and restore both the appeals of the assessee to this file with direction to re-decide both the appeals of the assessee on merits by giving reasonable sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee as well as to the Assessing Officer. The assessee is at liberty to raise all legal and factual submissions before Ld. CIT(A) for disposal of the appeals.

In the result both the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.