Vijay Kumar, New Delhi v. ITO WARD - 31(3), New Delhi

ITA 7022/DEL/2019 | 2011-2012
Pronouncement Date: 01-03-2021 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 702220114 RSA 2019
Assessee PAN BFQPK4688Q
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 7022/DEL/2019
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
Appellant Vijay Kumar, New Delhi
Respondent ITO WARD - 31(3), New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 01-03-2021
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 01-03-2021
Assessment Year 2011-2012
Appeal Filed On 23-08-2019
Judgment Text
1 ITA NO. 7022/DEL/2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-2 NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N. K. BILLAIYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE JUDI CIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 7022/DEL/20 19 (A.Y 2011-12) (THROUGH VIDEO CON FERENCING) VIJAY KUMAR H. NO. 635 BLOCK-B1 MADANGIR NEW DELHI BFQPK4688Q (APPELLANT) VS ITO WARD-31(3) NEW DELHI (RESPONDENT) ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER DATED 24/06/2019 PASSED BY THE CIT(A)- 11 NEW DELHI FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE INITIATIO N OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 AS WELL A S THE RESULTANT ORDER OF REASSESSMENT FLOWING THERE FROM DATED 11.1 2.2018 PASSED BY THE LD. AO WARD-31(3) NEW DELHI U/S 143(3)/147 OF THE ACT FOR AY 2011-12 AS VALID WHICH OTHERWISE IS ILLEGAL AN D IS BAD IN LAW APPELLANT BY SH. VINAY JAIN CA RESPONDENT BY SH. FARHAT KHAN SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 01.03.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 01.03.2021 2 ITA NO. 7022/DEL/2019 FOR WANT OF REQUISITE JURISDICTION AS THE MANDATOR Y REQUIREMENTS TO ASSUME JURISDICTION DID NOT EXIST OR HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLIED WITH APART FROM BEING CONTRARY TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATU RAL JUSTICE AND CONSEQUENTLY THE SAME IS LIABLE TO BE ANNULLED. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY LD AO AND NOT TENABLE AS THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 BY THE LD AO WARD 44(2) NEW DELHI IS ISSUED WITHOUT SEEKING ANY PERM ISSION WHICH IS IN CONTRAVENTION TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 151 O F THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 AND IS ILLEGAL AND NEED TO BE QUASHED 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY LD AO ON FLIMSY GROUND IGNORING THE WRONG FACTS IN THE OR DER PASSED BY THE LD AO REGARDING INFORMATION ABOUT THE CASH DEPO SIT OF RS. 11 98 172/- WHEN NO SUCH CASH IS EVERY DEPOSITED I N THE BANK ACCOUNT AND NO SUCH TRANSACTION EXIST IN THE BANK A CCOUNT. 4. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY LD AO AND NOT TENABLE BECAUSE OF GRANTING THE APPROVAL ON LY ON A MECHANICAL MANNER U/S 151 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 19 61 AND WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND 5. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY LD AO BECAUSE INVOKING PROVISIONS OF LAW U/S 147 OF THE A CT ONLY ON UPON THE BORROWED INFORMATION WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIN D. 6. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY LD AO 3 ITA NO. 7022/DEL/2019 IGNORING THE WRONG FACTS IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD AO REGARDING ISSUANCE OF NOTICE TO VERIFY THE MATERIAL ON RECORDS BEFORE THE INITIATION OF PROCEEDING U/S 147 WHEN NO SUCH L ETTER IS EVER ISSUED AND AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 7. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE LD AO IGNORING THE WRONG FACTS IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD AO REGARDING ISSUANCE OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE MANDATORIL Y REQUIRED TO MAKE ADDITION U/S 69A WHEN NO SUCH SHOW CAUSE NOTIC E IS EVER ISSUED AND AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 8. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE LD AO IGNORING THE THIRD PARTY CONFIRMATION FROM THE O FFICE OF THE CHIEF MANAGER SALCET BRANCH DELHI THAT TRANSACTION PERT AINS TO FIXED DEPOSIT OF RS. 3 00 000/- DT. 10/12/2010 AND JUST RENEWED ON VARIOUS DATES AND AMOUNT ALLEGED TO BE DEPOSITED IS CASH IS A CONCOCTED STOREY WITH ULTERIOR MOTIVE TO HARASS THE ASSESSEE. 9. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE LD AO IGNORING THE FACT THAT LD AO PASSED THE ORDER WI THOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATUR AL JUSTICE SATISFACTION RECORDED ON MECHANICAL MANNER FOR WAN T OF REQUISITE JURISDICTION ADDITIONS MADE WERE ON FLIMSY GROUND WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE REASON RECORDED FIRST AND WITHOUT CO NSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE AND REJECTED THE DOCUMEN TS WITHOUT VERIFICATION AND FOR WANT OF REQUISITE JURISDICTIO N. 10. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE LD 4 ITA NO. 7022/DEL/2019 AO IGNORING THE FACT THAT LD AO PASSED THE ORDER WI THOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATUR AL JUSTICE SATISFACTION RECORDED ON MECHANICAL MANNER FOR WAN T OF REQUISITE JURISDICTION ADDITIONS MADE WERE ON FLIMSY GROUND WITHOUT ADDRESSING THE REASON RECORDED FIRST AND WITHOUT CO NSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE AND REJECTED THE DOCUMEN TS WITHOUT VERIFICATION AND FOR WANT OF REQUISITE JURISDICTIO N. 11. THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY LD.CIT(A) 15 UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS.8 71094/- MADE BY LD. A.O IS BAD BOT H IN LAW AND FACTS AND NON EST AND NEED TO BE QUASHED. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS A SALARIED EMPLOYEE AND HAS A SM ALL BUSINESS OF PLYING AND HIRING OF GOODS CARRIAGE. INDIVIDUAL TRANSACTI ON STATEMENT AVAILABLE WITH THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CASH DEPOSITED IN BANK OF RS. 11 98 172/- DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2010-1 1 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FILED HIS ITR F OR THAT PERIOD. NOTICE U/S 148 WAS ISSUED ON 24/3/3018 AND WAS DULY SERVED UPO N THE ASSESSEE IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U/S 148 THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS ITR ON 9/10/2018 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 2 12 520/-. THE ASSE SSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS. 9 10 172/- U/S 69 A THEREBY STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THE ASS ESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNI SHED ALL THE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS WHILE THE CIT(A) HAS NOT TAKEN COGNIZANCE OF THE SAME AND RESTRICTED DISALLOWANCE ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.8 71 094/- AND DELETED THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 39 078/- SUBJECT TO VERIFICA TION BY ASSESSING OFFICER . THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS NO T DECIDED THE LEGAL ISSUE 5 ITA NO. 7022/DEL/2019 INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT ASSESSMENT YEAR THEREFORE REMAND BACK THIS MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A). 6. THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ORD ER OF THE CIT(A) AND THE REMAND REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER . 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE SUBMISSIONS ON BEH ALF OF THE LD. AR IT CAN BE SEEN THAT THERE ARE CERTAIN DOCUMENTS WHICH ARE REL EVANT TO THE RESTRICTED DISALLOWANCE BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE SAME SHOULD HA VE BEEN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BY THE CIT(A) WHICH WAS NOT DONE IN T HE PRESENT CASE. BESIDES THIS THE LEGAL ISSUE CONTESTED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT DEALT BY THE CIT (A). HENCE IT WILL BE APPROPRIATE TO REMAND BACK THE I SSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND DECIDE BOTH LEGAL ISSUE AS W ELL AS MERIT OF THE CASE. NEEDLESS TO SAY THE ASSESSEE BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING BY FOLLOWING PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 8. IN RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN BOTH THE PART IES ON THIS 01ST DAY OF MARCH 2021. SD/- SD/- (N. K. BILLAIYA) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED: 01/03/2021 R. NAHEED * 6 ITA NO. 7022/DEL/2019 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI