M/s Lam Holding P. Ltd.,, New Delhi v. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 2091/DEL/2016 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 28-09-2016 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 209120114 RSA 2016
Assessee PAN AAACL2289H
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 2091/DEL/2016
Duration Of Justice 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
Appellant M/s Lam Holding P. Ltd.,, New Delhi
Respondent ITO, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-09-2016
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC 1
Tribunal Order Date 28-09-2016
Date Of Final Hearing 27-09-2016
Next Hearing Date 27-09-2016
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 18-04-2016
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : SMC-I : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.2091/DEL/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 LAM HOLDING PVT. LTD. E-217 GREATER KAILASH PART-I NEW DELHI. PAN: AAACL2289H VS. ITO WARD 15(1) NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.P. SINGH DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAJESH KUMAR SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 27.09.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.09.2016 ORDER THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE EX PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 18.1.2016 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN DECLARING LOSS OF R S.9 553/-. THE AO INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147. THE ASSESSE E DID NOT PRODUCE THE ITA NO.2091/DEL/2016 2 NECESSARY DETAILS AS CALLED FOR BY THE AO IN RESPEC T OF CERTAIN ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES ALLEGEDLY RECEIVED BY THE ASS ESSEE. THIS LED TO THE PASSING OF ORDER U/S 144 MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 35 LAC. THE ASSESSEE REMAINED UNREPRESENTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND E VENTUALLY THE ADDITION OF RS.35 LAC MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT WAS UP HELD. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 3. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT CAN BE SEEN THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R HAS BEEN PASSED U/S 144 DUE TO NON-PRODUCTION OF THE RELEVANT BOOKS OF ACCOUNT BEFORE THE AO. THEREAFTER THE ASSESSEE ALSO REMAINED UNREPRE SENTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. AR EXPLAINED THE REASONS FOR NON PA RTICIPATION IN THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. I AM SATI SFIED WITH SUCH REASONS. IN MY CONSIDERED OPINION THE ENDS OF JUSTICE WOULD MEET ADEQUATELY IF ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSSEE TO P RESENT ITS CASE BEFORE THE AO. ACCORDINGLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS SET ASID E AND THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DECIDING THIS IS SUE AFRESH AS PER LAW AFTER ALLOWING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HE ARD TO THE ASSESSEE. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT IF THE ASSESSEE FAILS TO EXTEND PROPER CO-OPERATION DURING ITA NO.2091/DEL/2016 3 THE FRESH PROCEEDINGS AS WELL THE AO WILL BE ENTIT LED TO DRAW AN ADVERSE INFERENCE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28.09.20 16. SD/- [R.S. SYAL] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED 28 TH SEPTEMBER 2016. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR ITAT AR ITAT NEW DELHI.