IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                                `H' : NEW DELHI
                    DELHI BENCH `H

                             GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND
            BEFORE SHRI G.C. GUPTA,
                        MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
          SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI,

                             No.2730/Del/2011
                         ITA No.
                                         2004-05
                       Assessment Year : 2004-


Income Tax Officer,            Vs.    M/s Vini Financial & Management
Ward-
Ward-17(3),                           Pvt.Ltd.,
New Delhi.                            R.O. 302, Kirti Deep,
                                      Nangal Raya,
                                      New Delhi.
                                      PAN : AABCV8357P.

     (Appellant)                          (Respondent)

             Appellant by       :    Shri J.P. Chandrekar, Sr.DR.
             Respondent by      :    None.

      Date of hearing           :    07.09.2015
                                     07.09.2015
      Date of pronouncement     :    05.10.2015

                                ORDER

         GUPTA, VP :
PER G.C. GUPTA,
      This appeal by the Revenue for the assessment year 2004-05 is
directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-XIX, New Delhi dated 7th
March, 2011.


2.    At the time of hearing of the appeal, none appeared on behalf of
the assessee-respondent and, therefore, the appeal of the Revenue is
being decided ex parte qua the assessee-respondent on merits after
hearing the learned DR.


3.    The grounds of appeal of the Revenue are as under:-
                             2                       ITA-2730/Del/2011



"1. On the facts and circumstances and in law the
ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing appeal of the assessee, who,
even did not file the return of income in compliance to the
notice u/s 148, without placing any reasonable cause
before the Assessing Officer for non compliance of the said
notice.






2.    On the facts and circumstances and in law the
ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing appeal of the assessee, who did
not comply with the notices issued under section 142(1) of
the IT Act, without placing any reasonable cause before the
Assessing Officer for non compliance of the said notice,
despite adequate opportunities allowed.

3.    On the facts and circumstances and in law the
ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing appeal of the assessee, without
confronting the submissions of the assessee and its
objections to reasons recorded to the Assessing Officer.

4.    On the facts and circumstances and in law the
ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing appeal of the assessee, without
appreciating that the assessee had committed offence in
non production of books of accounts and other documents,
without a reasonable cause, which is an offence punishable
by rigorous imprisonment under section 276D of the IT Act.

5.    On the facts and circumstances and in law the
ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing appeal of the assessee, without
appreciating that the assessee had committed offence in
non furnishing of return of income, without a reasonable
cause, which is an offence punishable by rigorous
imprisonment under section 276CC of the IT Act.

6.    On the facts and circumstances and in law the
ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing appeal of the assessee, without
appreciating that the assessee had willfully evaded to
comply with the terms of notice dated 22/4/2008 issued
under section 148, and the notices issued under section
142(1) of the IT Act, despite that one Sh. Partap Gupta, CA
appeared during the assessment proceedings and signed
the Note Sheet entry dated 24.8.2009 as having noted the
requirement of filing the return of income and the details
as per questionnaire dated 7/7/2009."
                                   3                         ITA-2730/Del/2011



4.    Learned DR submitted that even after the issue of notice u/s 148
of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessee has not even filed the return
of income and, therefore, ex parte assessment u/s 144 of the Act was
made by the Assessing Officer.


5.    We have heard the submissions of the learned DR and have
perused the order of the Assessing Officer and the learned CIT(A). We
find that even after the issue of notice u/s 148, no return of income
was filed by the assessee.    Learned CIT(A) has decided the issue in
favour of the assessee ignoring the fact that the assessee has not
placed evidence before the Assessing Officer at the stage of the
assessment proceedings. The assessee seems to be non-cooperative
and has not appeared before the Tribunal on the date of hearing on
past many occasions also. In these facts of the case, we are of the
view that it shall be appropriate to set aside the orders of authorities
below to the file of the Assessing Officer with direction to frame a de
novo assessment in accordance with law after allowing due opportunity
of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate with
the Assessing Officer in the matter of finalization of the assessment
and shall be at liberty to produce evidence in support of its case before
the Assessing Officer. We direct accordingly.







6.    In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical
purposes.
      Decision pronounced in the open Court on 5th October, 2015.


                  Sd/-                                Sd/-
                MAHARISHI)
      (PRASHANT MAHARISHI)                       (G.C. GUPTA)
                                                 (G.C. GUPTA)
       ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                             PRESIDENT
                                                VICE PRESIDENT

VK.
                                 4                        ITA-2730/Del/2011




Copy forwarded to: -

1.   Appellant                          Ward-17(3), New Delhi.
                : Income Tax Officer, Ward-
2.   Respondent : M/s Vini Financial & Management Pvt.Ltd.,
                  R.O. 302, Kirti Deep, Nangal Raya, New Delhi.

3.   CIT
4.   CIT(A)
5.   DR, ITAT

                            Assistant Registrar