IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
(DELHI BENCH `A' : NEW DELHI)
BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 2393/Del/2016
Assessment Year: 2012-13
ACIT, CIRCLE 11(2), VS. H.R. POLYCOATS PVT. LTD.
NEW DELHI 4257/2, JAI MATA MARKET,
TRI NAGAR, NEW DELHI 35
(PAN AACCH2278J)
(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)
Revenue by : Sh. C.P. Singh, Sr. DR.
Assessee by : Sh. D.K. Jain, CA & Sh. Kartik Jain, CA
ORDER
PER H.S. SIDHU, JM
The Revenue has filed the Appeal against the Order dated
25.2.2016 of the Ld. CIT(A)-4, New Delhi pertaining to assessment
year 2012-13 on the following grounds:-
1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in admitting the
additional evidence ignoring the fact that assessee was
given full opportunity during the assessment proceedings.
2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in deleting the
estimate made by the AO rejecting books of account as the
assessee was not submitting the details of stock.
3. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the CIT(A) was correct in holding that the affidavits
filed by the AR regarding its attendance and submissions
2
not recorded by the AO is correct and thereby granting
relief to the assessee, in spite of the fact that none of the
letters filed by the assessee has the mention of the
previous hearings and the fact the AO was considerate
enough to grant 4 adjournments to the assessee back to
back during the course of assessment proceedings and
also the fact that the assessee has filed certain information
during the course of proceedings in the regular dak of the
AO."
4. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the CIT(A) was correct in ignoring the fact that the
assessee had failed to file a single original confirmation of
the parties in question and only photocopies were filed
which clearly were not bonafide evidences or compliance
to the question raised during the course of assessment
proceedings and therefore no relief could have been
granted to the assessee and also considering the fact that
even in additional evidence no proper confirmations were
filed as such before the CIT(A) and also considering the
strange fact that during the course of assessment
proceedings certain 133(6) were issued and came back
unserved but still there was compliance made by these
parties before the AO."
5. "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the CIT(A) was correct in holding that the
assessement should have been completed by the accepting
the books result of the company because of past history,
the assessee being a company and the VAT assessment of
credit of taxes was made by completely ignoring the fact
that not a single bonafide confirmation of creditors of raw
materials as well as expenses (only photocopies) were
submitted either before the AO or before the CIT(A) in the
3
appellate proceedings, in spite of several opportunities
granted to the assessee."
6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the
case, the CIT(A) was correct in not giving reasonable
opportunity to the AO u/s. 46A for submitting remand
report, on the so called additional evidences filed by the
assessee, which have not been even admitted by the
CIT(A) by passing a speaking order u/r. 46A(2) and also
when the CIT(A) itself has not examined any of the
additional evidences in a speaking manner to a conclusion
to grant relief to the assessee.
7. The appellant craves leave, to add, alter or amend
any ground of appeal raised above at the time of the
hearing.
2. The facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed
by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the
sake of convenience.
3. At the time of hearing, Ld. DR submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has
erred in not giving reasonable opportunity to the AO u/s. 46A for
submitting remand report, on the so called additional evidences filed
by the assessee, which have not been even admitted by the CIT(A)
by passing a speaking order u/r. 46A(2) and also when the CIT(A)
itself has not examined any of the additional evidences in a speaking
manner to a conclusion to grant relief to the assessee. Hence, he
requested that this matter may be set aside to the file of the Ld.
CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and pass a speaking order, after giving
4
adequate opportunity of being heard to the AO by calling the remand
report.
4. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has relied
upon the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) and stated that he has passed a
well reasoned order, which does not need any interference. He
further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has admitted the additional
evidences in accordance with law. However, for the sake of
convenience, the Ld. counsel for the assessee has filed a Paper Book
containing pages 1-383 i.e. explanation to grounds of appeal;
application for additional evidences filed before the CIT(A);
documents annexed to the application for additional evidences before
CIT(A) (a) cover letter of submissions filed before the AO (b) affidavit
by the Authorised Representative and Director of the assessee (c)
Sales tax assessment order of the assessee for AY 2012-13; (d) job
work bills, challans, fuel bills and stock register (e) order sheet of the
assessment proceedings and notices issued by the AO.
5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. After
perusing the relevant records available with us alongwith the orders
of the revenue authorities as well as the Paper Book filed by the Ld.
counsel for the assessee which also contains the application for
additional evidences filed before the CIT(A) and annexures thereto.
After perusing the finding of the Ld. CIT(A), we are of the considered
view that Ld. CIT(A) has not given reasonable opportunity to the AO
u/R. 46A for submitting his remand report, on the additional
5
evidences filed by the assessee, which have also not been even
admitted by the CIT(A) by passing a speaking order u/r. 46A(2),
which is not tenable. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we are
setting aside the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to
decide the same afresh, after calling AO's Remand Report on the
additional evidences filed before him u/R 46A and after hearing the
assessee, pass a well reasoned and speaking order, in accordance
with law.
6. In the result, Revenue's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 07-03-2019.
Sd/- Sd/-
[O.P. KANT] (H.S. SIDHU)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dt. 07.03.2019
SR BHATNAGAR
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR, ITAT
By Order,
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT Delhi Benches
6
|
