Shri Dinesh Kumar Sandilya, Shri Dinesh Kumar Sandilya, Mahavir Enclave, Mahavir Enclave, Enclave,Delhi.. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Officer, Income Tax Officer, New Delhi.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
`B' : NEW DELHI
DELHI BENCH `B
R.S.SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND
BEFORE SHRI R.S.SYAL,
YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER
SHRI RAJPAL YADAV,
Assessment Year : 2008-
Shri Dinesh Kumar Sandilya, Vs. Income Tax Officer,
RZ-D-70/3, Gali No.7, Ward-27(3),
Mahavir Enclave, New Delhi.
PAN : AVAPS1932J.
Appellant by : None.
Respondent by : Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, Sr.DR.
PER R.S.SYAL, AM :
This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by
learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XXIV, New Delhi on 13th
June, 2012 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09.
2. The first ground is against not providing adequate opportunity by
the Assessing Officer as well as by the learned CIT(A).
3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his
return declaring income of `1,11,475/-. In the absence of any co-
operation from the side of the assessee, the assessment was
completed under Section 144 at total income of `27.99 lacs. The
assessee argued before the learned CIT(A) that proper opportunity was
not granted by the Assessing Officer inasmuch as he was under acute
depression from August, 2010 to January, 2011 due to his differences
with the family. Additional evidence was put forth in support of the
additions made by the Assessing Officer. The learned CIT(A), on
receiving remand report from the Assessing Officer, refused to admit
the additional evidence and dismissed the assessee's appeal.
4. We have heard the learned DR and perused the material on
record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee. It is
observed that assessment in this case was completed under Section
144 for the reasons stated by the assessee that he was under acute
depression during the relevant period. The learned CIT(A) refused to
admit the additional evidence and summarily dismissed the assessee's
appeal. Under the given circumstances, we are of the considered
opinion that the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned
order is set aside and the matter restored to the file of the Assessing
Officer. We order accordingly and direct the Assessing Officer to frame
the assessment afresh as per law after allowing reasonable opportunity
of being heard to the assessee. Needless to say that the assessee will
be at liberty to lead any evidence in his defense in such fresh
proceedings. In view of our decision on the preliminary ground of
providing inadequate opportunity to the assessee, there is no need to
deal with the other grounds on merits. The issues in such grounds will
be taken care of by the Assessing Officer in fresh proceedings.
5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
Decision pronounced in the open Court on 6th November, 2013.
(RAJPAL YADAV) SYAL)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated : 06.11.2013
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant : Shri Dinesh Kumar Sandilya,
RZ-D-70/3, Gali No.7,
Mahavir Enclave, Delhi.
2. Respondent : Income Tax Officer,
Ward-27(3), New Delhi.
5. DR, ITAT