Sh. Ajeet Singh S/o Sh. Jawahar Singh, Village Ikladi Post Office Keshopur Sathla, Distt. Bulandshahr (Up) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bulandshahr
September, 03rd 2015
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH "A", NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
I.T.A. No. 4150/DEL/2014
SH. AJEET SINGH INCOME TAX OFFICER,
S/O SH. JAWAHAR SINGH, VS. WARD-1,
VILLAGE IKLADI BULANDSHAHR
POST OFFICE KESHOPUR
DISTT. BULANDSHAHR (UP)
Assessee by : SH. TARUN KUMAR, ADVOCATE
Department by : Sh. SUJIT KUMAR, SR. DR
Date of Hearing : 02-09-2015
Date of Order : 02-09-2015
PER H.S. SIDHU : JM
This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the
Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Meerut dated 28.3.2014
pertaining to assessment year 2009-10 on the following grounds:-
1. That having regard to facts & circumstances of the
case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing
the impugned order uls 250, without affording the proper
opportunity and deserves to be set aside.
2. That having regard to facts & circumstances of the
case, Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in passing an order of
dismissal of appeal by rejecting the adjournment
application of attorney, who was busy in pleading the
time barring matters.
3. That having regard to facts & circumstances of the
case, Ld. CIT (A) has erred in sustaining an addition of Rs
12,00,000/-, deposited by appellant in his saving bank
ale, of which source has been properly explained in
assessment proceedings and evidences are available on
record of A.O.
4. That the appellant craves the leave to add, amend,
modify, delete any of the grounds of appeal before or at
the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without
prejudice to each other.
2. The facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed
by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the
sake of convenience.
3. During the hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee, Shri Tarun
Kumar has stated that the Ld. CIT(A) has not given sufficient
opportunity to the assessee for substantiating his claim before him.
Therefore, he requested that the order of the Ld CIT(A) may be set
4. On the other hand, Ld. DR, Sh. Sujeet Kumar has relied upon
the order of the Ld. CIT(A).
5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records,
especially the order of the Ld. CIT(A). For the sake of convenience,
we are reproducing the hereunder the findings of the Ld. CIT(A):-
"2. Following dates of hearing were allowed to the
Date of Date fixed Remarks
issue of for hearing/
24.12.2013 16.1.2014 No compliance
07.2.2014 21.2.2014 No compliance
28.2.2014 19.3.2014 Adjournment application
19.3.2014 28.3.2014 Adjournment application
was received. The request
for adjournment cannot be
3. From the above it is evident that more than
sufficient opportunities of being heard have been allowed
to the appellant. 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. 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 absence of the
same, it is held that the AO was justified in making
additions. The same hereby confirmed. Grounds of
appeal are dismissed."
5.1 After hearing both the parties and perusing the aforesaid
finding of the Ld. CIT(A), we are of the view that no doubt that
assessee remained non-cooperative before the Ld. CIT(A), but on the
last date of hearing i.e. 28.3.2014, assessee filed the adjournment
application, which was not accepted by the Ld. CIT(A). In the
interest of justice, one more opportunity is required to be granted to
the assessee for substantiating his claim of being heard.
Accordingly, we remit back the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld.
CIT(A) with the directions to that one more opportunity may be
granted to the assessee of being heard, to substantiate his claim.
The Assessee is also directed to fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A)
and not to take unnecessary adjournment.
6. In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed
for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 02/09/2015.
[T.S. KAPOOR] [H.S. SIDHU]
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant -
2. Respondent -
4. CIT (A)
5. DR, ITAT
TRUE COPY By Order,
ITAT, Delhi Benches