Tally for Practicing CAs Gold Edition (Multi User) Tally for CAs in Industry Silver Edition (Single User) Tally Renewal (Auditor Edition) Need Tally for Clients? (Tie-up with us!!!)
News shortcuts: From the Courts | Top Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | Professional Updates | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax | PPE Safety Kit SITRA Approved | PPE Safety Kit
From the Courts »
 Ganapati Breweries Ltd., UG-03, An Sal Majestic Tower, Plot No.17, G Block, Commercial Complex, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018 Vs. ITO, Ward-12(1), New Delhi
 Mitsui & Co. Ltd. Plot No. D1, 4th Floor, Selcon Ras Vilas, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi vs. DDIT (International Taxation) Circle-3(1) New Delhi.
 Sh. Alok Swarup, C/o-M/s Malik & Co.(Adv.) 305/7, Thapar Nagar, Meerut City, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Aayakar Bhawan, Meerut Road, Muzaffarnagar
 Shri Sanjay Sharma 418, Imperial Block, Supertech Estate Sector 9, Vaishali, Ghaziabad Vs. The A.C.I.T Circle 59(1) New Delhi.
 Nawal Kishore Soni vs. ACIT
 PCIT vs. Gulbrandsen Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.
 Delhi HC dismisses RSSB chief Gurinder Singh Dhillon's application seeking not to put ITR on record
 The Dy. CIT, Circle 11(1), Room No.405, C.R. Building, New Delhi. Vs. M/s. Ebony Retail Holdings Ltd., F-2/1, Khanpur Extension, New Delhi
 M/s PAD COM LLP C/o. R.B.Arora & Co., DSM- 127, DLF Towers, ShivajiMarg, Moti Nagar, New Delhi Vs. ACIT Circle-36(1) New Delhi
 M/s. Jupiter Healthcare Co. F-11, Naveen Shahadra, New Delhi Vs. The ACIT, Circle 56(1), New Delhi.
 Gayatri Seva Sansthan, 155, G.T. Road, Panchwati, Ghaziabad. Vs. Addl. CIT, Range 1, Ghaziabad.

Tejpal Singh, 861, S.P. Mukherji Marg, Behind Novelty Cinema, New Delhi-110 052 vs. ITO, Ward -34(4) Delhi
January, 31st 2019
                 DELHI BENCH "SMC": NEW DELHI


                       ITA No.:- 5125/Del/2018
                      Assessment Year: 2013-14

     Tejpal Singh,                          ITO,
     861, S.P. Mukherji Marg,               Ward -34(4)
     Behind Novelty Cinema,          Vs.    Delhi
     New Delhi-110 052                      Pan AATPS7743P
     (Appellant)                            (Respondent)

       Assessee by:        Shri Anoop Sharma, Advocate
       Department by :     Shri S.L. Anuragi Sr. DR
       Date of Hearing     30/01/2019
       Date of               31 /01/2019


       The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against
impugned order dated 12.1.2018 passed by Ld. CIT(A) 12, New Delhi
for the quantum of assessment passed u/s 143(3) for the assessment
year 2013-14. The assessee is mainly aggrieved by ex parte order
passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and also various additions made by the AO
assessing the income at Rs. 27,44,000/- as against the return income
of Rs. 2,07,146/-.

2.     Before us, Ld. Counsel submitted that not only before the AO
but also before the Ld. CIT (A), no proper opportunity has been given
to the assessee. First of all, he drew our attention to para 2 of the
assessment order and pointed out that only effective notice given by
the AO dated 15.3.2016 to which assessee attended on 18.3.2016
alongwith the details and thereafter further details were asked by the
AO vide order sheet dated 21.3.2016. However, within seven days he
has passed the order on 29.3.2016. The AO has made various
additions without even considering the material placed on record or
giving further opportunity to explain the issues and filing of details.
Even Ld. CIT(A) has passed ex parte order despite letter of
adjournment was filed in the office of the CIT(A) which was sought on
the ground that counsel was ill and was unable to argue the case.
Under these facts and circumstances, he submitted that matter
should be restored back to the file of the AO for deciding the issue

2.   Ld. DR submitted that he has no objection if the entire issue is
set aside to the file of the AO for making afresh assessment.

3.   From the perusal of the impugned orders, we find that the Ld.
AO at para 2 of the assessment order himself has said that earlier year
notices were unserved and one notice dated 15.3.2016 was served to
assessee in response to which certain details were filed by the Counsel
of the assessee. Thereafter, AO asked for further details, however, the
time allowed was very short and accordingly, he has made huge
addition vide assessment order dated 21.3.2016. Again from the
perusal of the impugned appellate order, it is seen that the first notice
sent could not be served upon the assessee and on another two
occasions assessee has filed for adjournment and thereafter the Ld.
CIT (A) had decided the appeal ex parte confirming the addition made
by the AO. Thus, it is quite palpable that no proper opportunity has
been given to the assessee to present this case. Accordingly, in the
interest of justice, the entire matter is remanded back to the file of the
AO to re-decide the issues afresh and in accordance with law after

giving due and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee to
substantiate this case.

4.        In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Order pronounced in the open court on             31st     January, 2019.


                                                          (AMIT SHUKLA)
                                                         JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated:         31 /01/2019
Copy forwarded to
     1.   Applicant
     2.   Respondent
     3.   CIT
     4.   CIT (A)
     5.   DR:ITAT
                                                   ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

                                                           ITAT, New Delhi

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us | PPE Kit SITRA Approved | PPE Safety Kit
Copyright 2020 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting