Latest Expert Exchange Queries
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) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
Popular Search: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: VAT RATES :: TDS :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: empanelment :: form 3cd :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4% :: cpt :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: due date for vat payment :: VAT Audit :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company
From the Courts »
 Group M. Media India Pvt. Ltd vs. UOI (Bombay High Court)
 Shreemati Devi vs. CIT (Allahabad High Court)
 Vatsala Shenoy vs. JCIT (Supreme Court)
  Dr. Gautam Sen vs. CCIT (Bombay High Court)
 Dr. Gautam Sen vs. CCIT (Bombay High Court)
 DCIT vs. Shivshankar R. Sharma (ITAT Mumbai)
 ACIT vs. Jawaharlal Agicha (ITAT Mumbai)
 CIT vs. M/s. D. Chetan & Co (Bombay High Court)
 Makes further amendments to Notification no. 157/90-Customs dated 28th March, 1990 regarding temporary admission under the ATA Carnet
 Appointment of Common Adjudicating Authority by DGRI - 2/2016-Customs

ACIT, Circle 1 Meerut Vs. Sh.Harish Kumar Bansal C/o Sh.Vinod Kumar Goel, 282 Boundary road, Civil Lines Meerut
August, 22nd 2015
                  DELHI BENCH `SMC-2', NEW DELHI


                          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

 (Appellant)                                           (Respondent)

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


      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

"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

                              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.

                                           JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: the 21st August, 2015


Copy of the Order forwarded to:
 1.    Appellant;
 6.Guard File

                                                        By Order

                                                       Asst. Registrar

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Portal Design Website Design Portal Designing Website Designing Web Design Professional Portal Design Professional Website Design Professional Web Design Portal Design India Website Design India Portal Designing India Website Designing India Web Design India Professional Portal Design India Professional Website Design India Chicago Professional Web Design New York Professional Web Design California Website Design Florida Website Design New Jersey Website Design Britain UK Website Design London Manchester Website Design

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