ITA No.- 6620/Del/2016.
M/s Raman Kumar Sawhney.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
(DELHI BENCH: `F': NEW DELHI)
BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No:- 6620/Del/2016
(Assessment Year: 2012-13)
M/s Raman Kumar ITO,
Sawhney, Vs. Ward-50(3),
New Delhi. New Delhi.
PAN No: AAKPS4637B
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
Assessee by : Shri Mohd. Amir, Adv.
Revenue by : Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR
ORDER
Per Anadee Nath Misshra, AM
(A) This appeal by Assessee is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of
Income Tax (Appeals)-17, New Delhi, ["Ld. CIT(A)", for short], dated 27.10.2016 for
Assessment Year 2012-13. The grounds of appeal are as under:
1. That the order of the Ld. Commissioner of appeals and the ld. ITO are bad
at law and on facts of the case.
2. That proper opportunity was not granted to the assessee for presenting
the proper facts of the case thus violating the principles of natural Justice.
3. That the additions made by the Ld. ITO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT
Page 1 of 7
ITA No.- 6620/Del/2016.
M/s Raman Kumar Sawhney.
(Appeals) are not justified. As during the course of appeal there was a change
in the counsel to whom sufficient time was not granted to prepare and submit
the requisite evidences and contest the case. There was confusion because the
date was fixed for 25th October 2016 and by department as mistake it was kept
in the date of 26.10.2016 which was not intimated to the counsel nor the
assessee as is clear from the copy of CIT order showing date of hearing as
26.10.2016.
4. That the addition U/s 68 made for Rs 26., 55., 000/- from relatives has
wrongly been added.
5. That the addition U/s 68 made of Rs 3,30,000/- for cash deposited in bank
account from earlier withdrawals from bank has been wrongly added.
6. That the addition U/s 68 made for 30,20,000/- has wrongly been added.
7. That the addition of Rs 10,55,800/- made by the ld. A.O U/s 68 and
directed by the Ld. CIT to be made U/s 41(1) is baseless as the amounts were
not found credited in the books in the year under scrutiny nor there was any
remission in liability during the year under assessment. Therefore it has been
wrongly added.
8. That the addition U/s 68 made for 23,53,000/- has wrongly been added.
9. That Disallowing loss of Rs 34,943/- as account of F & 0 share trading
activities without viewing the details is unjustified.
10. That disallowance of commission of Rs 200,000/-which is in ordinary course
business is not justified.
11. That disallowance of 20% on account of personal expenses is not justified.
12. That the benefit of brought forward losses has not been Provided.
13. That the other disallowance although nominal in amount as shown under
have neither been discuss not the AO nor Specified any reason of those
disallowances.
S.No. Particular Amount
1. Difference in Depreciation 19
2. Interest Paid on Service Tax Being 30,900
Penal in nature
3. STT, Service Tax and Stamp duty not 29,516
incidental to business activities
4. Transaction Charges on Shares not 2,188
incidental to business
5. Demat Charge not incidental to 1,785
business
6. Brokerage on Shares not incidental 2,459
to business
Page 2 of 7
ITA No.- 6620/Del/2016.
M/s Raman Kumar Sawhney.
14. That interest of Rs. 6,55,884/- U/s 234B has been wrongly charged.
15. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete and modify all or any of the
grounds of appeal, at any time during the course of this appeal and request
and opportunity of being heard before the order are passed on this appeal."
(B) Assessment Order was passed on 16.03.2015 Under Section 143(3) of Income
Tax Act, 1961, ("I.T. Act", for short) wherein total income of the Assessee was
determined at Rs. 80,52,480/- as per following computation:
Income from House Property
Income as declared 1,74,052
Business income
Net Loss as per P & L a/c (-) 19,94,840
Less: STCG & LTCG (Rs. 504402 + 34943) for 5,39,345
separate consideration
(-) 14,55,495
Other income for separate consideration (Rs. (-) 5,71,911 (-) 20,27,405
281375 + 248645+ 16113+ 25777)
Less: Difference in Depreciation Claim 19
Interest paid on Service tax being penal in 30,900
nature
STT, Service tax and Stamp duty not incidental 29,516
to business activities
Transaction charges on shares not incidental to 2,188
business
Demat Charge not incidental to business 1,785
Brokerage on shares not incidental to business 2,459
Unexplained credits u/s 68 of the Act 26,55,000
Unexplained cash deposits to Capital A/c u/s 68 3,30,000
Page 3 of 7
ITA No.- 6620/Del/2016.
M/s Raman Kumar Sawhney.
Unexplained credits u/s 68 30,20,000
Disallowance of commission to R.K. Sawhney 2,00,000
HUF
Unexplained credits u/s 68 10,55,800
Unexplained credits u/s 68 23,53,000
Disallowance out of Car expenses 83,791 97,64,458
79,11,105
Short-term capital Loss 0
Short-term Capital loss on a/c of F & O 0
79,11,554
Income from other sources
Bank interest as declared 14,278
Interest on NSC 2,41,843
Interest on I.T refund 23,604
IFCI Infra bonds 1650 2,81,375
81,92,480
Less: Deduction u/s 80C, 80D & 80CCF 1,40,00
Taxable income 80,52,480
Or say : Rs. 80,52,480/-
(B.1) The Assessee filed appeal before the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals)-17, New Delhi. The Assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) during
appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A), and filed requests for adjournments
repeatedly. Vide ex-parte order dated 27.10.2016, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the
Page 4 of 7
ITA No.- 6620/Del/2016.
M/s Raman Kumar Sawhney.
assessee`s appeal on merits, on the basis of details / materials available on his record.
The Assessee has filed the present appeal in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("ITAT",
for short) against the aforesaid impugned ex-parte order dated 27.10.2016 of the Ld.
CIT(A). When the appeal came up before us for hearing, the Ld. Counsel for assessee
requested for restoration of the disputed issues in this appeal to the file of the Ld.
CIT(A) for fresh order, so that the assessee has an opportunity of being heard by the
Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Departmental Representative ("DR", for short) also agreed that all
the disputed issues in the present appeal in ITAT filed by the Assessee may be restored
to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh order on merits, provided the assessee co-
operates in speedy disposal of appeal by the Ld. CIT(A) and does not take unnecessary
adjournments.
(C) We have heard both sides. We have perused the materials available on record.
We find that the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order in which assessee's submissions
could not be considered because of failure of the assessee to avail of opportunities
provided by the Ld. CIT(A). Before us both sides are in agreement that all the disputed
issues may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
Accordingly, we set aside the impugned ex-parte order dated 27.10.2016 of Ld. CIT(A),
and restore all the disputed issues to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh orders on
merits after providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Assessee is also
directed to co-operate in speedy disposal of appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) in pursuance
Page 5 of 7
ITA No.- 6620/Del/2016.
M/s Raman Kumar Sawhney.
to this order; and , to not request unnecessary adjournments. The assessee is further
directed to appear in the office of the Ld. CIT(A) on 15.10.2019 for receiving notice of
hearing from the office of the Ld. CIT(A).
(D) In the Result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 19th day of August, 2019.
Sd/- Sd/-
(H.S. SIDHU) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 19.08.2019
Pooja/-
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT NEW DELHI
Page 6 of 7
ITA No.- 6620/Del/2016.
M/s Raman Kumar Sawhney.
Date of dictation
Date on which the typed draft is placed before the
dictating Member
Date on which the typed draft is placed before the
Other Member
Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.
PS/PS
Date on which the fair order is placed before the
Dictating Member for pronouncement
Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.
PS/PS
Date on which the final order is uploaded on the
website of ITAT
Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk
Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk
The date on which the file goes to the Assistant
Registrar for signature on the order
Date of dispatch of the Order
Page 7 of 7
|
