Latest Expert Exchange Queries

GST Demo Service software link:
Username: demouser Password: demopass
Get your inventory and invoicing software GST Ready from Binarysoft
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
Popular Search: VAT RATES :: VAT Audit :: form 3cd :: empanelment :: due date for vat payment :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: cpt :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: TDS
From the Courts »
 Order of a Four-Member Appellate Authority constituted under Chartered Accountants Act is Valid: Delhi HC
 Emami Infrastructure Ltd vs. ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
  Anand Agarwal vs. Vilas Chandrakant Gaokar (Bombay High Court)
 Bar Council of India vs. A. K. Balaji & Ors (Supreme Court)
 ITO vs. Venkatesh Premises Co-op Society Ltd (Supreme Court)
 Pr CIT vs. Amphenol Interconnect India P. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 Pr CIT vs. Amphenol Interconnect India P. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 Anand Agarwal vs. Vilas Chandrakant Gaokar (Bombay High Court)
 Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-I Vs. Smt. Ritu Singal
 Vinod Kumar Gupta Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax Central Circle-17
 How you can gift and still save tax on top of HRA, tuition fee, more Income Tax Returns (ITR) filing top hack

Income Tax Officer, Ward 36(4), 1st Floor, H-Block, Vikas Bhavan, I.P. Estate, New Delhi Vs. Saransh Jain Trust, E-726, Mayur Vihar, Phase-II, Delhi
April, 29th 2015
                                                          ITA NO.3890/Del/2007

                      DELHI BENCH "G", NEW DELHI
                   SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                      I.T.A. No. 3890/DEL/2007
                             A.Y. : 2003-04
WARD 36(4), 1 FLOOR,                  VS. E-726, MAYUR VIHAR,
H-BLOCK, VIKAS BHAVAN,                      PHASE-II,
I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI                      DELHI
                                            (PAN: AAFTS0046P)
(APPELLANT)                                    (RESPONDENT)

         Department by                :    Sh. B.R.R. KUMAR, SR. DR
          Assessee by                 :    Sh. SALIL KAPPOR, ADV.

                      Date of Hearing : 27-04-2015
                      Date of Order       : 27-04-2015

     This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the Order of the
Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XXVII, New Delhi dated
23.05.2007 pertaining to assessment year 2003-04 on the following

            "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the
            Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.
            15,00,000/- made on account of undisclosed income
            declared in the guise of Gift".

            The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to
            amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of

                                                    ITA NO.3890/Del/2007

          appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this

2.   At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee stated that

the assessee has filed the Application under Rule 29 of the Income

Tax Tribunal Rules for admission of additional evidence vide

Application dated 08.08.2013. He requested that the additional

evidences mentioned in the Application may be admitted and the

case of the assessee may be decided on merits.

3.   On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the order passed by the AO

and opposed the request of the Ld. Counsel of the assessee for

admission of additional evidences.

4.   We have heard both the parties and perused the relevant

records available with us, especially the orders passed by the

Revenue Authority alongwith the contention raised by the assessee

in the Application for admission of additional evidence as well as

small Paper Book containing pages 1 to 71 having the copy of From

No. 36 alongwith the grounds; copy of CIT(A) order dated 23.5.2007;

copy of Form NO. 35; copy of assessment order u/s. 148/143(3)

dated 22.7.2004; copy of notice u/s. 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated

22.7.04; copy of the reasons recorded in AY 2003-04; copy of the

submission filed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A); copy of

additional synopsis; copy of gift deed of     Sh. Qayyum Khan &

Chuttan Khan; copy of affidavit of Sh. Qayyum Khan; copy of pass
                                                        ITA NO.3890/Del/2007

book; copy of income tax returns; copy of the ITAT Order            dated

15.10.2004 in case of     Jai Narain Maheshwari,     HUF vs. Qayyuim

Khan. etc.    We find that Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted

that the additional evidences before the Tribunal which were never

filed with the lower authorities, since neither the AO nor the CIT(A)

asked the assessee to produce the evidences during the course of

assessment proceedings and appellate proceedings. We are of the

view that the AO has completed the assessment u/s. 148/143(3) of

the I.T. Act, 1961 on 28.2.2006 and made the additions in dispute.

In view of the above, we are not commenting upon the merit of the

case and on the additional evidences filed by the assessee. We are

of the considered view that the AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has not

asked the assessee to file those evidences which goes to the root of

the case and which is very helpful to decide the issues in dispute, as

per law, which needs to be considered at the level of the AO.

4.1   Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the present

case and the additional evidences filed by the assessee, we are of

the view that the additional evidences filed by the assessee is

required to be adjudicated at the level of the AO, because it will

goes to the root of the case and is very helpful to decide the issues,

in dispute, as per law. In the interest of justice, the issues in dispute

are set aside de novo to the AO to decide the same afresh, under

the law, after giving full opportunity to the assessee of being heard.

                                                    ITA NO.3890/Del/2007

5.    In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stands allowed

for statistical purposes.

      Order pronounced in the Open Court on 27/04/2015.

      Sd/-                                            Sd/-

[N.K. SAINI]                                    [H.S. SIDHU]
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                            JUDICIAL MEMBER
Date 27/04/2015
Copy forwarded to: -
1.    Appellant -
2.    Respondent -
3.    CIT
4.    CIT (A)
5.    DR, ITAT              TRUE COPY
                                                By Order,

                                               Assistant Registrar,
                                               ITAT, Delhi Benches

    ITA NO.3890/Del/2007

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Binarysoft Technologies - Careers

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