AJMS ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

This appeal, at the instance of the revenue, is filed against the order of the CIT (Appeals)-IV, New Delhi dated 27.09.2011 for the assessment year 2006-07.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the AO’s order and the CIT(A)’s order has been passed ex-parte without hearing the assessee; and he pointed out from the assessment order that the AO has mentioned that the notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) was issued to the assessee. However, he pointed out that the notices have been sent to the address i.e. LG-21, Thapar Chamber-II, Ring Road, Delhi. According to the ld. AR, the address to which the notices were sent, was the old address and the assessee company was not functioning at that address. The fact of the change of the address was intimated well in advance by letter dated 18.01.2003 to the AO (ITO, Coy Ward 1(1)) and pointed out that ITRs for AYs 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06 were filed physically duly stipulating the present new address i.e. 205, IInd Floor, Vardhman Mayur Plaza, Mayur Vihar Phase – II, Delhi – 110 091. Thus, according to the ld. AR, therefore, the impugned/alleged notices u/s 143(2) / 142(1) as claimed to have been issued at the old/non-existent address of the assessee company is not valid and issuance and serving of 143 (2) notice is sine qua non for completing the scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act. Further, he submitted that the CIT (A), also passed the impugned ex-parte order. So, the ld. AR’s prayer is that the assessee has filed an application under Rule 29 for admission of additional evidences vide application dated 08.01.2014 and took our attention to the same. He pleaded that the said additional evidences may be admitted and the same may be remanded back to the CIT (A) to adjudicate the grounds raised by the assessee against the order of the AO.

Ld. DR for the revenue does not have any objection for admitting the additional evidences, however, he submitted that the matter may be remanded back to the CIT (A) for adjudicating the issues raised by the assessee.

We have heard both the sides and perused the materials on record. We have noted that the address shown in the assessment order is LG-21, Thapar Chamber-II, Ring Road, Delhi and the assessee’s claim is that they have left that premises and the new address is 205, IInd Floor, Vardhman Mayur Plaza, Mayur Vihar Phase – II, Delhi – 110 091. According to the assessee, the change of address had been intimated well in advance by letter dated 18.01.2003 to the then AO (ITO, Coy Ward 1(1)) and ITRs for AYs 2003-04, 2004-05 and 2005-06 were filed physically duly stipulating new address, namely, 205, IInd Floor, Vardhman Mayur Plaza, Mayur Vihar Phase – II, Delhi – 110 091. We find that the impugned CIT (A)’s order is also an ex-parte order. Therefore, in the interest of justice and equity, we admit the additional evidences filed before us and we set aside the order of the CIT (A) and remand the matter back to the file of the CIT (A) to decide afresh issues raised by the assessee, of course after providing an opportunity to the assessee of being heard. We also direct the assessee to cooperate with the proceedings before the CIT (A). We order accordingly.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on this 11th day of March, 2016.