SBT FINVEST PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5516/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 January 2016AY 2004-052 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given an adequate opportunity of hearing before the assessment order was passed. Therefore, the matter was set aside to the AO to provide the assessee with another opportunity to represent its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee received a notice under Section 143(2) on December 1, 2011, but the Assessing Officer (AO) had already passed the assessment order on November 30, 2011. This prevented the assessee from presenting its case and providing necessary documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of hearing by the AO before passing the assessment order. Whether the initiation of proceedings under Section 148 was valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 148,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI O.P.KANT

For Appellant: CA Sh. Nem Singh, CA
For Respondent: Smt. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 23.12.2015Pronounced: 28.01.2016

O R D E R

PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.08.2013 of ld CIT(A)-X, New Delhi for the Assessment Year 2004-05.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds:- “

1. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the initiation of proceeding u/s 148, as there was no application of mind on the AO’s part, in the initiation of such proceedings.

2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming an addition made by AO’s u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act of Rs.49,80,000/- on account of Share Application Money.

3. That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming an addition made by AO’s u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act of Rs.7,13,143/- on account of Unsecured Loan.”

3.

We have heard the heard both the parties and have considered the relevant material on record. At the outset we note that the AO issued a notice u/s 143(2) on 18.01.2011 by fixing the date of hearing of the matter on 28.11.2011. The ld AR of the assessee has submitted that this notice dated 18.11.2011 was received by the assessee only on 1st December 2011, whereas the AO has already passed the impugned assessment order on 30.11.2011 and therefore, the assessee was not given an appropriate opportunity of hearing by the AO before passing the

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →