ALKA MALHOTRA,LUDHIANA vs. ITO, WARD VI(1), LUDHIANA

This is an appeal filed by the Assessee u/s 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein referred to as ‘the Act’] as and by way of second appeal before this Tribunal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing No. ITBA/NFAC/5/250/2022-23/1048/364205(1) dated 30.12.2022 of ld. CIT(A) passed u/s 250 of the Act which is herein after referred to as the “impugned order”. The relevant A.Y. is 2012-13 and the corresponding previous period is from 1.4.2011 to 31.3.2012.

82-Chd-2023 Alka Malhotra, Ludhiana 2 2. The Assessee in Form 36 which is Form of appeal to this Tribunal has raised following grounds of appeal to challenge the legality, validity and proprietary of the impugned order :-

1. That the impugned order has been passed by the Ld. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi without proper application of mind and without considering evidence and material already on records, as such the order is liable to be set aside. The Appellant has not been given reasonable and proper opportunity for re-presenting his case, which has resulted in erroneous order and untenable conclusion.

2. That the Ld. CIT (A) has failed to consider that reasons for re-opening of the case u/s 147 of the IT. Act, 1961 have not been given by the Ld. AO with copy of approval by the Ld. Pr. CIT-3, Ludhiana passed without proper application of mind and in a Routine manner.

3. That the Ld. CIT (A), has failed to consider that the Appellant's request for copies of documents relied on, copy of statement of Sh. Anil Kumar Khemka and others have not been provided to the Appellant, which has made the order void abinitio and bad in law. Various contentions raised before the Ld. AO have not been appraised properly, as such the order deserves to be set aside. Principles of natural justice have been violated and the addition has been confirmed without considering and accepting appellant's request for meeting the justice in the matter.

4. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A), is not justified in confirming

82-Chd-2023 Alka Malhotra, Ludhiana 3 the addition of Rs.49,30,414 made by the Ld. AO u/s 68 of the IT. Act, 1961. The addition confirmed is not based on proper appraisal of facts and documents and other details already on records.

82-Chd-2023 Alka Malhotra, Ludhiana 4 without considering that the Appellant has denied any transaction and/or dealing with DLS Exports Private Limited.

8. Without prejudice to foregoing contentions rather fully relying on the same the addition for the same amount of LTCG has been made twice without considering that the Appellant has denied any transaction and/or dealing with DLS Exports Private Limited.

That the reassessment framed by the ld. Assessing Officer is not sustainable in law, for want of statutory requirement for issuance of Notice u/s 143(2) of the 82-Chd-2023 Alka Malhotra, Ludhiana

5. I.T. Act, 1961 after filing of the Return. The order so passed is liable to be set aside for non-issuance of Notice u/s 143(2) of the Act.”.

4. That the hearing in the matter took place before us on 27.11.2024 when ld. AR brought to our notice at the outset and threshold that the impugned order is in the violation of the Principles of Natural Justice, bad in law and illegal. The ld. AR contended that during the course of the first appellate proceedings before CIT(A) total 07 notices were issued for hearing which are all stated in the impugned order in Para 5, however, the same was not attended to due to certain issues beyond the control of the Assessee. In addition to this submission ld. AR pleaded that issue involved is complex and it would be just fair and convenient that matter be remanded back told CIT(A) to pass a speaking and reasoned order on merits of the case so that this Tribunal can enrich with the finding of Ist Appellate Authority in case issues are decided against the Assessee. However, for the present in the impugned order, no merit are even discussed. Issues are not considered meritoriously at all. Per Contra ld. DR has not resisted this contention of the AR. The ld. AR has undertaken before us that if the matter is remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) the Assessee would cooperate with the Department in speedy manner in such way that Ist appeal is disposed off meritoriously by ld. CIT(A).

82-Chd-2023 Alka Malhotra, Ludhiana 6

5. In the premise we set aside the impugned order and remand the case back to the file of the CIT(A) to pass a fresh order on de novo basis. We direct Assessee to attend the hearing as and when fixed by the ld. CIT(A) and not to seek any adjournment. The ld. CIT(A) to pass speaking and well-reasoned order on merit.