Sanjay Mahur, Bulandshahr v. ITO, Ward- 3(2), Bulandshahr

ITA 479/DEL/2018 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 05-11-2019 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 47920114 RSA 2018
Assessee PAN AWWPM3839K
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 479/DEL/2018
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 16 day(s)
Appellant Sanjay Mahur, Bulandshahr
Respondent ITO, Ward- 3(2), Bulandshahr
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 05-11-2019
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 05-11-2019
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 19-01-2018
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 479/DEL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SANJAY MAHUR VS. ITO WARD 3(2) C/O RRA TAXINDIA BULANDSHAHR D-28 SOUTH EXTENSION PART-I NEW DELHI 49 (PAN: AWWPM3839K) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY :SH. SOMIL AGGARWAL ADV. & SH. DEEPESH GARG ADV. REVENUE BY : SH. AMRIT LAL SR. DR. ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER DATED 30.10.2017 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) ALIGARH RELATI NG TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS. 1. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN PASSING THE IMPUGNED EX-PARTE ORDER AND THAT TOO WITHOUT PROVID ING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND WITHOUT OBSERVI NG THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 2. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT QUA SHING THE IMPUGNED REASSESSMENT ORDER ULS 144/147 AND THAT TO O WITHOUT ASSUMING JURISDICTION AS PER LAW AND WITHOU T COMPLYING WITH MANDATORY CONDITIONS U/S 147 TO 151 AS ENVISAGED UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961. 3. THAT IN ANY CASE AND IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IN NOT QUASHING THE IMPUGNED REASSESSMENT OR DER U/S 2 144/147 IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 4. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE; LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN N OT QUASHING THE IMPUGNED REASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY LD. AO U/ S 144/147 AND THAT TOO WITHOUT SERVING THE MANDATORY NOTICES ULS 143(2) AND 142(1) OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961. 5. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMST ANCES OF THE CASE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT QU ASHING THE IMPUGNED EX-PATE ORDER PASSED BY LD. AO ULS 144/147 AND THAT TOO WITHOUT SERVING SHOW CAUSE NOTICE U/S 144 AND WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AS PRE SCRIBER UNDER THE LAW. 6. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRM ING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.12 64 000 /- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT BY TREATING IT AS ALLEGED C ASH CREDIT U/S 68 AND THAT TOO BY RECORDING INCORRECT FACTS AN D FINDINGS AND WITHOUT OBSERVING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUS TICE. 7. THAT IN ANY CASE AND IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.12 64 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITS U/S 68 IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE AND THE SAME IS NOT SUSTAINABLE ON VARIOUS LEGAL AN D FACTUAL GROUNDS. 8. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT REV ERSING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN TAKING THE RETURNED INCOME AT N IL INSTEAD OF RS.1 47 990/- AS MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT OR DER. 3 9. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT REV ERSING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN CHARGING INTEREST U/S 234A AND 234B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961. 10. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE LEAVE TO ADD MOD IFY AMEND OR DELETE ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING AND ALL THE ABOVE GROUNDS ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO EACH OTHER. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED 10 GROUNDS OF APPEAL BUT AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ONLY ARGUED THAT LD. CIT(A) AS WELL AS AO HAVE PASSED THEIR EXPARTE ORDERS WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR SUBSTANTIATING HIS CASE. HENCE HE REQUESTED THAT ISSUES IN DISPUTE MAY BE SET ASIDE T O THE FILE OF THE AO BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING ALL THE NECESSARY DO CUMENTARY EVIDENCES FOR SUBSTANTIATING THE CLAIM WHICH CAN ONLY BE VE RIFIED/INVESTIGATED BY THE AO. 3. LD. SR. DR HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION ON THE R EQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE OR DERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. I AM OF THE VIEW THAT AO HAS P ASSED THE EXPARTE ORDER U/S. 144/147 OF THE ACT AND LD. CIT(A) HAS AL SO PASSED THE EXPARTE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30.10.2017. THEREFORE IN MY CONSIDERED VIEW AND IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE REQUIRE THOROUGH INVESTIGATION/VERIFICATION AT THE LEVEL OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER. ACCORDINGLY THE ISSUES IN DISPUTE ARE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION AFTER GIVING ADEQU ATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING 4 HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED THROUG H HIS COUNSEL TO FULLY COOPERATE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE PROCEED INGS AND DID NOT TAKE ANY UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 05/11/2019. SD/- [H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE 05/11/2019 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT - 2. RESPONDENT - 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT DELHI BENCHES