Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Attachment on Cash Credit of Assessee under GST Act: Delhi HC directs Bank to Comply Instructions to Vacate
 Income Tax Addition Made Towards Unsubstantiated Share Capital Is Eligible For Section 80-IC Deduction: Delhi High Court

Praveen Kumar Sharma, C/o Mukesh Kumar Gupta, 2, Sunder Puri, Bulandshahr (UP)- 203001 VS. ITO, Ward-2, Income Tax Teachers Colony, Bulandshahr
August, 13th 2014
                                                            ITA NO.3507/Del/2013


                IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                     DELHI BENCH "C", NEW DELHI
             BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
                                      AND
                  SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER


                           I.T.A. No. 3507/DEL/2013
                                  A.Y. : 2006-07
Praveen         Kumar           VS.                    ITO, Ward-2,
Sharma,                                                Income Tax Teachers
C/o Mukesh Kumar                                       Colony,
Gupta,                                                 Bulandshahr
2, Sunder Puri,
Bulandshahr      (UP)-
203001
(PAN:- AJPPS5960H)
(APPELLANT)                                            (RESPONDENT)



            Assessee by                :    Sh. Saurabh Gupta, CA
           Department by               :    Sh. Satpal Singh, Sr. DR


                               ORDER
PER H.S. SIDHU, JM
     This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order dated
15.3.3013 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),
Meerut pertaining to assessment year 2006-07.

2.   The grounds raised by the assessee are as under:-


     "1.    That the Ld. AO was erred in not opting assessment of
            Trade Tax under Samadhan Scheme.

     2.     That the Ld. AO was erred in enhancing the sale on the
            basis of trade tax paid by the assessee               under the
            Samadhan Scheme.


                                       1
                                                                       ITA NO.3507/Del/2013


       3.        That the order of the Ld. AO was against the law and
                 facts    of     the   case    and     based     on    surmises       and
                 conjectures."

3.       The facts relating to the issue are in dispute that the return
of income from brick kiln filed by the assessee on 25.1.2007 and the
case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s. 143(2) were issued
on 28.1.2008.            Ld. Counsel for the assessee sought adjournments
three times.        Notice       u/s. 142(1) was issued on 1.8.2008, but no
compliance was made from the side of the assessee, except seeking
adjournment and another notice u/s. 142(1) of the IT Act was issued
on 24.11.2008 and date for compliance was fixed on 4.12.2008, but
this notice also got not complied with and accordingly, the case was
got barred by limitation on 31.12.2008.                         However, one more
opportunity was given to the assessee by serving a notice u/s.
142(1) dated 11.12.2008 and date for compliance was fixed for
17.12.2008. Assessee was required to produce the relevant books
of accounts, documents and evidences. The books of accounts and
other details / documents in support of sales disclosed have not
been produced neither details and basis of trade tax payment has
been     furnished. In view of these facts, the assesee has not made
compliance to the show cause letter issued along with notice u/s.
142(1)      of    the     I.T.   Act   dated       11.12.2008    for   completion       of
assessment. Hence,               the AO proceeded exparte              and made the
assessment order u/s. 144 of the I.T. Act and income assessed on
Rs. 3,40,670/- and addition was accordingly made.

4.     Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, assessee appealed
before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order dated 15.3.2013
partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee.




                                               2
                                                       ITA NO.3507/Del/2013


5.   Against the above impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee
has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.

6.        Ld. Counsel of the assessee has submitted Ld. AO as well as
Ld. CIT(A) has not given adequate opportunity to canvass his case
properly by producing the evidence      before him. Therefore, he has
requested to kindly allow him to canvass his case before the AO.

7.   On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld.

CIT(A).


8.   We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. We

find Ld. AO has not given sufficient opportunity to the assessee for

substantiating his claim before the AO.        Similarly, the Ld. First

Appellate Authority has partly allowed the appeal, by rejecting the

main request of the assessee, which is contrary to the principle of

natural justice.    We find that AO has issued notice for producing

necessary evidence for a very short time and assessee could not

produced sufficient evidence before the AO.        In view of the facts

and circumstances, we are of the view that the it would be fair and

just, if the issues are sent back to the file of the AO for fresh

adjudication, after giving full opportunity to the assessee for

substantiate its claim before the AO.   Accordingly, we set aside the

issues to the file of the AO with the direction to consider the same

afresh.       Assessee is also directed to produce all the relevant

materials and documents to the AO and not to take unnecessary

adjournment.
                                   3
                                                    ITA NO.3507/Del/2013


9.    In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

for statistical purposes.


      Order pronounced in the Open Court on 08/8/2014.

      Sd/-                                            Sd/-

      SYAL]
[R.S. SYAL]                                           SIDHU]
                                                [H.S. SIDHU]
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                               JUDICIAL MEMBER

Date 08/8/2014
"SRBHATNAGAR"
Copy forwarded to: -
1.    Appellant -

2.    Respondent -
3.    CIT
4.    CIT (A)
5.    DR, ITAT


                            TRUE COPY
                                                By Order,




                                                Assistant Registrar,
                                                ITAT, Delhi Benches




                                 4
    ITA NO.3507/Del/2013




5

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting