IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH `SMC', NEW DLEHI
BEFORE : SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.2721/Del/2019
Assessment Year: 2010-11
Reena Sehgal, vs. Income-tax Officer,
F-100, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi. Ward 62(2), New Delhi.
PAN : AQNPS5567R
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by: Mr. Upvan Gupta, C.A.
Respondent by: Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. DR.
Date of hearing : 05.02.2020
Date of Pronouncement : 06.02.2020
ORDER
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee, wherein
correctness of the order dated 25.01.2019 of CIT(A)-38, New Delhi
pertaining to 2010-11 assessment year is assailed on the following
grounds:
"1. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law,
the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax
(appeals)-38, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as `Learned CIT(A)'
under section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (`the Act'), is bad
in law and void ab-initio.
2. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law,
the learned assessing officer has erred in making additions to
2
income amounting to Rs.16,70,000/- pertaining to cash deposit in
Bank account.
3. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law,
the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause to produce
additional evidences before the CIT(A)."
2. At the time of hearing an adjournment application was moved on
behalf of the assessee. However, considering the material available on
record, the adjournment request was withdrawn and the ld. AR, inviting
attention to the impugned order, submitted that the assessee did not
receive the notice for the date of hearing before the ld. Commissioner of
Income-tax (Appeals). In view thereof, the assessee remained un-
represented. Accordingly, it was his limited prayer that the order may be
set aside to the file of CIT(A) in order to grant an effective opportunity of
being heard.
3. Considering the material available on record, ld. Sr. DR did not
oppose the request.
4. A perusal of the record shows that certain deposits in the bank
account of the assessee were required to be addressed. For want of
representation, the addition was made by the Assessing Officer by an
order u/s. 144 read with section 147 of the Income-tax Act. Before the ld.
3
CIT(A) also, the assessee remained un-represented. In view thereof and in
the interest of substantial justice, the impugned order is set aside to the
file of ld. CIT(A) with the direction to pass a speaking order in accordance
with law. The assessee is directed to place full facts before him, which the
ld. CIT(A) shall consider at the time of hearing after giving the assessee a
reasonable and effective opportunity of being heard. The assessee in his
own interest is advised to make full and proper representation before the
said authority and not to abuse the trust reposed.
3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order was pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing
itself. Sd.0
(DIVA SINGH)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 06/02/2020
`aks'
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5. DR: ITAT
Assistant Registrar
ITAT New Delhi
|