IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                  DELHI BENCH `SMC-2', NEW DELHI

                 BEFORE SHRI H.S.SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                          ITA No.3962/Del/2014
                              AY: 2006-07

Sh.Harish Kumar Bansal                      vs.   ACIT, Circle 1
C/o Sh.Vinod Kumar Goel, 282                      Meerut
Boundary road, Civil Lines
Meerut

PAN: AAOPB 2100 L
 (Appellant)                                           (Respondent)

                         Appellant by  : Sh. V.K. Goel, Adv.
                        Respondent by : Sh. Robin Rawal, Sr.D.R


ORDER


      This is an appeal      filed by the Assessee    against the     order dt.
28.3.2014 of Ld.CIT(A), Meerut for the Assessment Year 2006-07, on the
following grounds.
"1. That Ld.A.O. as well as Ld.CIT(A) is not justified in not      providing an
opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

2.     That Ld.A.O. as well as Ld.CIT(A) is unjustified in disallowing a sum of
Rs.3,72,500/- being the amount of interest paid on loans deductible from
interest earned on unsecured loan given to M/s Harish Industries Pvt.Ltd. for
which such loans were taken and Ld.AO as well as Ld.CIT(A) is unjustified in
not considering the fact that the loans were taken in earlier year and interest
paid on those loans is continuously being allowed in earlier years. The case
for the immediately preceding A.Y. was assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act.






3. That Ld.A.O. as well as Ld.CIT(A) is unjustified in disallowing a sum of
Rs.75,000/- u/s 80DD of the Act.

4. That the assessee has right to add, delete or modify any grounds during
the appeal proceeding."
                              ITA No. 3962/Del/2014
                                   A.Y. 2006-07
                             Sh. Harish Kumar Bansal

2.    The facts as narrated by the Revenue authorities are not disputed by
both the parties, therefore, no need to repeat the same for convenience.


3.    I have heard both the parties, perused the record available before me,
specially the order passed by the Revenue authorities along with paper book
filed by the assessee containing pages 1 to 20 in which the assessee has
attached various documentary evidences, which includes          photo copy of
computation of income, capital a/c and statement of affairs, photocopy of
reply filed before AO, photocopy of details of unsecured loan, photo copy of
confirmations and photo copy of case laws.


4.    Keeping in view the written submissions          as well as documentary
evidences filed by the assessee before the Revenue authorities as well as
before me in the shape of paper book containing 1 to 20 pages, I am of the
considered view that the Ld.First Appellate Authority          has not given
sufficient opportunity to the assessee for substantiating his claim before
him. No doubt the Ld.First Appellate Authority has issued various notices
to the assessee and the assessee remained no-cooperative before him and
filed application for adjournment for one and another reasons. The Ld.First
Appellate Authority has decided the issues in dispute against the assessee
by passing a non speaking order which is not permissible and sustainable in
the eyes of law.    For the sake of convenience the relevant part of the
Ld.CIT(A)'s order paras 3 and 4 at pages 4 and 5 are reproduced herein
below.

"3. From the above it is evident that more than sufficient opportunities of
being heard have been allowed to the appellant.             The appellant filed
adjournment application and the case was adjourned many times. However,
the appellant either has not made any compliance or has filed adjournment
application. This implies that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the
appeal for the reasons best known to him. Since sufficient opportunity of
being heard, so no further adjournment can be granted. Therefore, the appeal
is disposed off on the basis of material evidence on the record.

4. Since the appellant has not furnished any details and evidences against
the additions made by the AO in the assessment order. Therefore, in the


                                                                           2
                              ITA No. 3962/Del/2014
                                   A.Y. 2006-07
                             Sh. Harish Kumar Bansal

absence of the same, it is held that the AO was justified in making additions.
The same are hereby confirmed. Grounds of appeal are dismissed."









5.    Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and
the impugned order, I am of the view that the issue in dispute requires
reconsideration at the level of the Ld.First Appellate Authority with direction
to decide the same afresh as per law, after affording the assessee
reasonable opportunity.


6.    In the result the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for
statistical purposes.


      Order pronounced in the Open Court on 21st August, 2015.



                                                     Sd/-
                                              (H.S.SIDHU)
                                           JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: the 21st August, 2015

*manga

Copy of the Order forwarded to:
 1.    Appellant;
 2.Respondent;
3.CIT;
 4.CIT(A);
5.DR;
 6.Guard File

                                                        By Order




                                                       Asst. Registrar




                                                                           3