Swaran Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi v. ITO, Ward-22(4), New Delhi

ITA 7784/DEL/2018 | 2009-10
Pronouncement Date: 08-11-2019 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 778420114 RSA 2018
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 7784/DEL/2018
Appellant Swaran Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
Respondent ITO, Ward-22(4), New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 08-11-2019
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 08-11-2019
Assessment Year 2009-10
Appeal Filed On 06-12-2018
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 7784/DEL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 SWARAN ASSOCIATES PVT. LTD. VS. ITO WARD 22(4) B-122 PUSHPANJALI ENCLAVE NEW DELHI PITAMPRUA DELHI 34 (PAN: AAKCS7604K) (ASSESSEE) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. ASHISH GOYAL CA & SH. UMANG LUTHRA ADV. REVENUE BY : SH. AMRIT LAL SR. DR. ORDER THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.09.2018 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-31 NEW DELHI RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED U/S 250 BY THE CIT(A ) IS INVALID AND IS LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE BECAUSE NO REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AND IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JU STICE. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE VALIDITY OF REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S 147/148 OF THE I.T ACT. 3. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN UPHOLDING THE VALIDITY OF THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER WHICH IS WITHOUT COMPLYING WITH THE MANDATORY 2 CONDITIONS OF SECTION 147 TO 153 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 THEREFORE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT IS BAD IN LAW AND MAY PLEASE BE ANNULLED. 4(I)THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) HAS ERRED B OTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF R S. 40 00 000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CRE DIT U/S 68 OF I.T. ACT 1961 BEING AMOUNT RECEIVED FRO M M/S MANI MALA DELHI PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. M/S EURO ASIA MERCANTILE PVT. LTD. AND M/S LOTUS REALCON PVT LTD ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE SUBSCRIPTION MONEY. IN THIS REGARD ALL OF HIS OBSERVATIONS ARE WRONG INCORRECT AND AGAINST T HE FACTS OF THE CASE AND MATERIAL ON RECORD. (II) THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 72 000/- U/S 69C OF THE I.T. ACT 1961 BEING AMOUNT ALLEGED A S PAID FOR OBTAINING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. IN THIS REGARD ALL OF HIS OBSERVATIONS ARE WRONG INCORRECT AND AGAINST T HE FACTS OF THE CASE AND MATERIAL ON RECORD. (III) THAT THE AFORESAID ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN MADE W ITHOUT BRINGING ON RECORD ANY MATERIAL OR EVIDENCE TO PRO VE THE ALLEGATION OF THE AO AND ARE CONTRARY TO THE MATERI AL ON RECORD AND ARE BASED ON CONJECTURE AND SURMISES. 5. THAT THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED BOTH ON FACTS A ND LAW IN MAKING AN ASSESSMENT AT INCOME OF RS. 40 97 600/ - AGAINST INCOME OF RS. 25 600/- DECLARED BY THE ASSE SSEE. 6. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED CIT(A)-31 NEW DELHI HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE 3 LEVY OF INTEREST OF RS. 10 55 207/- AS CHARGED BY AO U/S 234B OF I.T. ACT 1961. 7. THE ABOVE GROUND OF APPEAL IS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ONE ANOTHER. 8. THE APPELLANT CRAVES IN THE RIGHT TO ADD AMEND MODIFY OR DELETE ANY GROUNDS OR GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE O R AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE STATED THAT ASSESSEE FILED APPLICATION BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) FO R ADJOURNMENT WHICH WAS WRONGLY REJECTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND DECIDED THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT HEARING THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE. TO SUPPORT HIS CONTENTION HE DRAW MY ATTENTION TOWARD S PAGE NO. 13 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER WHICH IS A COPY OF APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR SEEKING ADJOURNMENT AND THE FINDING AT PAGE NO. 14 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR REJECTING THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ADJOURNMENT AND DECIDED THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED THAT THE ISSUE IN DISPUTE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AS PER LAW AFTER GIVING AD EQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 3. ON THE CONTRARY LD. DR HAS NOT RAISED ANY SERI OUS OBJECTION ON THE REQUEST OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 4. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE O RDERS PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES ESPECIALLY PAGE NO. 13 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER WHICH IS A COPY OF APPLICATION FOR SEEKING ADJOURNM ENT BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE FINDING AT PAGE NO. 14 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDE R OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR REJECTING THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ADJOURNM ENT AND DECIDED THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAIL ABLE ON RECORD I AM OF THE VIEW THAT ASSESSEE HAS FILED ALL THE DOCUMENTAR Y EVIDENCES BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED O RDER AGAINST THE 4 ASSESSEE WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEES COUNSEL WH ICH IS CONTRARY TO PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR ADVANCING HIS ARGUMENTS ORALLY AS WELL AS IN WRITING BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES WHICH HAS NOT BEEN GRANTED. THEREFORE IN MY VIEW LD. CIT(A) HAS WRONGLY PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER WITHOUT AFFORDING THE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING WHICH IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW . THEREFORE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE I SET ASIDE THE ISSUES IN DISP UTE TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) WITH THE DIRECTIONS TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTE R GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSE E IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FULLY COOPERATE WITH THE LD. CIT(A) AND DID NOT TAK E ANY UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 08/11/2019. SD/- [H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE 08/11/2019 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