Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, A.M.: The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of learned CIT(A) dated 18.10.2012 passed for the assessment year 2003-04. The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal: i. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Hon’ble CIT (Appeals) is bad both in the eye of law and on facts. ii. That the Hon’ble CIT(Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 5,00,000/- on account of unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the IT Act, 1961. iii. That the Hon’ble CIT(Appeals) has grossly erred in law and in facts in confirming the disallowance of loss of Rs. 6,45,162/- as was claimed in original return filed. iv. That Hon’ble CIT(Apepals) erred in law and in facts in confirming the reopening of the case u/s 147 without making an independent enquiry and without having reasons to believe that the income has escaped assessment.
2 v. That the Hon’ble CIT(Appeals) erred in law and in facts in confirming additions made by the Ld. AO, u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 on the on the basis of notices sent on wrong address. vi. That the Hon’ble CIT(Appeals) erred in law and in facts in confirming the additions made by the Ld. AO u/s 144 without furnishing the reasons for reopening the case u/s 147 of the Act. vii. That the Hon’ble CIT(Appeals) erred in law and in facts in not accepting the application for filing the addition evidences under Petition under Rule 46A. viii. That the appellant craved leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of the appeal 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a Non-banking Finance Company registered with the Reserve Bank of India. The return of income for the assessment year 2003-04 was filed on 2nd December, 2003 disclosing a loss of Rs. 6,45,162/-. No scrutiny assessment was made thereon. However, the assessment was reopened by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) on 15th March, 2010 after receipt of the information that the appellant is a beneficiary of the accommodation entries of Rs. 5 lakhs and the assessment was completed vide order dated 04.11.2010 at a total income of Rs. 5 lakhs. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) who vide impugned order dated 18.10.2012 dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before us with the present appeal.
The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that during the course of appellate proceedings the CIT(A) had confirmed the addition based on the remand report of the Assessing Officer without giving an opportunity to the appellant to rebut the findings of the Assessing Officer given in the remand 3 report. Therefore, he prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the CIT(A).
On the other hand, the learned Sr. DR has no serious objections to the prayer of the learned counsel for the assessee.
We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. In the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the interest of justice would be served, if the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We order accordingly. Hence, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. The decision is pronounced in the open court on 6th November, 2015.