Sumeena Arora, New Delhi v. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 4043/DEL/2010 | 2004-2005
Pronouncement Date: 22-03-2011 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 404320114 RSA 2010
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 4043/DEL/2010
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 22 day(s)
Appellant Sumeena Arora, New Delhi
Respondent ITO, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 22-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 22-03-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 22-03-2011
Next Hearing Date 22-03-2011
Assessment Year 2004-2005
Appeal Filed On 31-08-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH G DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ITA NO. 4043(DEL)2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05 SUMEENA ARORA INCO ME TAX OFFICER E-296 GREATER KAILASH-I V. WARD NO. 47(2) NEW DELHI. NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI R.C. RAI CA RESPONDENT BY: SHRI KISHORE B DR ORDER PER A.D. JAIN J.M. THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 004-05 TAKING THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AS WELL AS IN LAW THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)XXX GROSSLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER IS VA LID IN SPITE OF FACTS THAT THE CONTENTION OF APPELLANT THAT NO NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 WAS SERVED/ISSUED AND IS SUPPORTED DE CISION OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. ESHAAN HOLDI NG PVT. LTD. REPORTED IN 2009 TIOL 494 HC-DEL-IT(DEL) AND SPEC IAL BENCH OF HONBLE ITAT NEW DELHI IN THE CASE OF KUBER TOBBAC CO PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. V. CIT REPORTED IN 2009 28-SOT-292(DEL )(SB). ITA 4043(DEL)2010 2 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AS WELL AS IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A)XXX GROSSLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE COPY OF ADVERSE MATERIAL WAS PROVIDED TO ASSESSEE WHICH IS OTHERWIS E NOT PROVIDED TO APPELLANT NOR OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE THE WITN ESS OF REVENUE WAS PROVIDED. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AS WELL AS IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A)XXX GROSSLY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT SE CTION 68 IS VALIDLY APPLIED BY LD. AO AND SUSTAINING THE ADDITIONS OF ` 3 00 000/- WHICH IS OTHERWISE NOT TAXABLE IN LAW AS WELL AS IN SPIT E OF FACTS THAT NO BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IS MAINTAINED BY ASSESSEE AND THE TRANSACTION WAS SUPPORTED WITH NUMEROUS LEGALLY TENABLE EVIDENCES. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AS WELL AS IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A)XXX NEW DELHI GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT P ROVIDING THE OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT THE CLAIM OF LD. AO THROUGH HI S REMAND REPORT. 2. GROUND NO.1 IS NOT PRESSED. REJECTED AS NOT PR ESSED. 3. AS PER GROUND NO.4 THE LD. CIT(A)HAS ERRED IN N OT PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO REBUT THE REMAND REP ORT OF THE AO. 4. IN PARA 5 AT PAGES 8 TO 10 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDE R THE LD. CIT(A) HAS REPRODUCED THE REMAND REPORT OF THE AO. THEREAFTE R IN PARA 6 AT PAGE 10 THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVES:- 6. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT THE EVIDENCES FILED BY HER AS WELL AS THE ASSESSMENT OR DER AND THE REMAND REPORT SENT BY THE AO.. 5. AS SUCH THE ASSESSEE WAS INDEED NOT PROVIDED AN Y OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO REBUT THE REMAND REPORT OF THE AO. TH EREFORE THIS MATTER NEEDS TO BE REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO BE DECIDED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW ON CONFRONTING THE ASSESSEE WITH THE OBSERVATI ONS OF THE AO AND ITA 4043(DEL)2010 3 ALLOWING HER OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT THE SAME. THE AO SHALL ALSO CONSIDER AND DECIDE THE GRIEVANCE OF THE AO THAT NO COPY OF MATERIAL ADVERSE TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS UTILIZED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE WAS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ISSUE REGARDING APPLICABILITY OF T HE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE I.T. ACT QUA THE ADDITION OF ` 3 00 000/- SINCE AS PER THE ASSESSEE SHE HAD NOT MAINTAINED ANY BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THIS MATTER COMPRISES GROUND NOS. 2&3 BEFORE US. 6. IN THE RESULT FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES THE APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22.03.2011. SD/- SD/- (SHAMIM YAHYA) (A.D. JAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 22.03.2011 *RM COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR