Shri Satyawan Gahlaut,16/147-148, 2nd Floor,E-16/147- Sector-Rohini Vs. Income Tax Officer,Ward-37(3),New Delhi.
June, 06th 2012
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
`G' : NEW DELHI
DELHI BENCH `G'
C.GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND
BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA
A.N.PAHUJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Assessment Year : 2007-
Shri Satyawan Gahlaut, Vs. Income Tax Officer,
16/147-148, 2nd Floor,
Sector-8, Rohini, N-Block, Vikas Bhawan,
Delhi 110 085. New Delhi.
PAN : AAOPG8761E.
Appellant by : Shri Kapil Goel and
Shri Tarun Kumar, Advocates.
Respondent by : Smt.Veena Joshi, Sr.DR.
G.C.GUPTA, VP :
This appeal by the assessee for the AY 2007-08 is directed
against the order of learned CIT(A).
2. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under:-
"1. At the time of framing order u/s 144 of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 on 11.12.2009, the ld.AO has treated the
income from profession of Rs.6,20,000/- instead of
agriculture income declared by the assessee during the
course of assessment proceedings without giving proper
opportunity to the assessee.
2. Neither the ld.AO has considered our submission
regarding agricultural income of Rs.6,20,000/- and taken
wrongly as income from profession nor the ld.CIT(A) has
also considered the submission of the assessee during the
course of appellate proceeding.
3. The ld.CIT(A) has decided the appeal within 45 days
from the receipt of appeal without giving proper
opportunity to the assessee and also without calling the
remand report from the Assessing Officer as provided in
the act in sub-section (4) of section 250. Moreover, the
appellant was also not received the appellant order and
the copy of the same was received on demand from the
CIT(A) on 01.02.2012."
3. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the
assessee has filed appeal before the CIT(A) on 8.2.2010 and the CIT(A)
decided the appeal within 45 days i.e. on 25.3.2010 without giving
proper opportunity to the assessee and also without calling the remand
report from the Assessing Officer. He submitted that the assessee was
in a position to establish that he has earned income from agriculture
and the same was not considered properly by the Revenue authorities.
He submitted that the assessment was also framed ex parte by the
Assessing Officer under Section 144 of the Act and there was
compulsion on the part of the assessee in not filing the necessary
evidence before the Assessing Officer.
4. The learned DR has opposed the submissions of the learned
counsel for the assessee. She submitted that opportunity was
provided by the Assessing Officer as well as CIT(A) to explain its case
to the assessee. The assessee could not file any evidence in support of
its claim of having agricultural income during the year and the
assessee could not file documentary evidence in support of the case of
the assessee. She relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and the
5. We have considered the rival submissions carefully and have
perused the order of the Assessing Officer and learned CIT(A). We find
that ex parte assessment was framed in this case by the Assessing
Officer under Section 144 of the Act. The assessee has explained the
circumstances due to which it could not file the necessary evidence in
support of its case before the Assessing Officer. The learned CIT(A)
has passed the appellate order without calling for any remand report
from the Assessing Officer. The assessee is an Advocate by profession
and has declared professional income, interest income and agricultural
income amounting to `6,20,000/- for the relevant assessment year. In
the facts of the case, we are of the view that proper opportunity should
be provided to the assessee by the CIT(A) to substantiate its claim
regarding the earning of the agricultural income and opportunity
should be given to the Assessing Officer also to submit his comments
in the form of the remand report. In this view of the matter, we hold
that it shall be in the interests of justice to set aside the order of
learned CIT(A) to his file with a direction to pass a de novo appellate
order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of
hearing to both the parties. The assessee is directed to cooperate with
the Revenue authorities in the matter of finalization of its assessment
and shall be at liberty to file any evidence in support of its case before
the CIT(A). We direct accordingly.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
Decision pronounced in the open Court on 4th June, 2012.
JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT
Dated : 04.06.2012
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant : Shri Satyawan Gahlaut,
16/147-148, 2nd Floor,
Delhi 110 085.
2. Respondent : Income Tax Officer,
N-Block, Vikas Bhawan,
5. DR, ITAT