Harjit Singh Chadha, C-348, Defence Colony, New Delhi 110 024 vs. DCIT, Central Circle-23, ARA Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi 55
October, 28th 2015
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH "SMC-2": NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 2094/Del/2014
A.Y. : 2009-10
Harjit Singh Chadha, vs. DCIT, Central Circle-23,
C-348, Defence Colony, ARA Centre,
New Delhi 110 024 Jhandewalan Extn.,
(PAN : AADPC4802B) New Delhi 55
Assessee by : Sh. Adhir K. Samal, CA & Ms.
Apporva Bhardwaj, CA
Department by : Sh. Sujit Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing : 26-10--2015
Date of Order : 26-10-2015
This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the Order of the Ld.
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXXIII, New Delhi dated 27.12.2013
pertaining to assessment year 2009-10.
2. The grounds of appeal read as under:-
1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law while upholding the addition
made by the AO in respect of gift received by assessee from his
father in law of Rs. 2,96,590/- by ignoring the submissions of
the assessee and provisions of section 56(2)(vi) of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 and as such the addition of Rs. 2,96,590/- may
please be deleted.
2. That the assessee crave to add, alter, delete, modify or
withdraw any of the above grounds at the time of hearing.
3. The facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the
parties, therefore, the same are not repeated here for the sake of convenience.
4. At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel for the Assessee stated that the Revenue
has not given sufficient opportunity to the assessee for producing the Bank
Statement of the donor establishing Fund Flow through the Banking channel. He
further stated that the assessee is having all documentary evidences for
substantiating his claim before the Revenue Authorities and requested for one more
opportunity to substantiate the claim of the assessee.
5. Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and stated that
sufficient opportunity was provided by them to the assessee.
6. I have heard both the parties and perused the orders passed by the Revenue
Authorities alongwith relevant records available with the Appeal filed. I find
considerable cogency in the submissions of the assessee that Revenue has not given
sufficient opportunity to the assessee for producing the Bank Statement of the donor
establishing Fund Flow through the Banking channel. I also find that now the
assessee is having all documentary evidences for substantiating his claim before the
Revenue Authorities and hence, his request for seeking one more opportunity to
substantiate the claim of the assessee before the Assessing Officer seems to be
genuine. Therefore, in the interest of justice, I remit back the issues in dispute to the
file of the Assessing Officer to consider the same afresh, after considering all the
documents viz. Bank Statement of the Donor and Fund Flow through Banking
Channel etc. The Assesee is also directed to fully cooperate with the AO and
produced all the documents before the AO to substantiate his claim. Needless to
add that the assessee should be given adequate opportunity of being heard.
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 26/10/2015.
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4.CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT
TRUE COPY By Order,
Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Benches