sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Latest Expert Exchange
From the Courts »
 M/s A Daga Royal Arts vs. ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
 Gagan Infraenergy Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
 PCIT vs. Chawla Interbild Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 All India Federation of Tax Practitioners vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
 Mangammal @ Thulasi vs. T.B. Raju (Supreme Court)
 Mahabir Industries vs. PCIT (Supreme Court)
  Oriental Bank Of Commerce Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
  Union of India vs. Pirthwi Singh (Supreme Court)

Shri Dinesh Kumar Sandilya, Shri Dinesh Kumar Sandilya, Mahavir Enclave, Mahavir Enclave, Enclave,Delhi.. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Officer, New Delhi.
November, 07th 2013
                                 `B' : NEW DELHI
                    DELHI BENCH `B

                      R.S.SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND
                           YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER
               SHRI RAJPAL YADAV,

                         ITA No.
                       Assessment Year : 2008-

Shri Dinesh Kumar Sandilya,     Vs.    Income Tax Officer,
RZ-D-70/3, Gali No.7,                  Ward-27(3),
Mahavir Enclave,                       New Delhi.
     (Appellant)                           (Respondent)

             Appellant by        :    None.
             Respondent by       :    Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Sr.DR.


      This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by
learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XXIV, New Delhi on 13th
June, 2012 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09.

2.    The first ground is against not providing adequate opportunity by
the Assessing Officer as well as by the learned CIT(A).

3.    Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his
return declaring income of `1,11,475/-.       In the absence of any co-
operation from the side of the assessee, the assessment was
completed under Section 144 at total income of `27.99 lacs.            The
assessee argued before the learned CIT(A) that proper opportunity was
not granted by the Assessing Officer inasmuch as he was under acute
depression from August, 2010 to January, 2011 due to his differences
with the family. Additional evidence was put forth in support of the
                                    2                         ITA-3670/Del/2012

additions made by the Assessing Officer.        The learned CIT(A), on
receiving remand report from the Assessing Officer, refused to admit
the additional evidence and dismissed the assessee's appeal.

4.    We have heard the learned DR and perused the material on
record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee. It is
observed that assessment in this case was completed under Section
144 for the reasons stated by the assessee that he was under acute
depression during the relevant period. The learned CIT(A) refused to
admit the additional evidence and summarily dismissed the assessee's
appeal.     Under the given circumstances, we are of the considered
opinion that the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned
order is set aside and the matter restored to the file of the Assessing
Officer. We order accordingly and direct the Assessing Officer to frame
the assessment afresh as per law after allowing reasonable opportunity
of being heard to the assessee. Needless to say that the assessee will
be at liberty to lead any evidence in his defense in such fresh
proceedings.    In view of our decision on the preliminary ground of
providing inadequate opportunity to the assessee, there is no need to
deal with the other grounds on merits. The issues in such grounds will
be taken care of by the Assessing Officer in fresh proceedings.

5.    In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
      Decision pronounced in the open Court on 6th November, 2013.

                   Sd/-                                Sd/-
           (RAJPAL YADAV)                             SYAL)
                                                (R.S. SYAL)
          JUDICIAL MEMBER                   ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated : 06.11.2013
                                  3               ITA-3670/Del/2012

Copy forwarded to: -

1.   Appellant    : Shri Dinesh Kumar Sandilya,
                 RZ-D-70/3, Gali No.7,
                 Mahavir Enclave, Delhi.

2.   Respondent : Income Tax Officer,
               Ward-27(3), New Delhi.
3.   CIT
4.   CIT(A)
5.   DR, ITAT

                            Assistant Registrar
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Integrated Software Solutions Integrated Software Development Integrated Software Services Integrated Software Solutions India Integrated Softw

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions