Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi

A.K.G. Associates (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs Dcit, New Delhi on 4 August, 2017

                                      1                        IT(SS)A No. 5/Del/2016


                      IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                         DELHI BENCH: 'A' NEW DELHI

              BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
                                    AND
                 MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

              IT(SS)A No. 5/DEL/2016 (A.Y 1/4/1996 to 7/5/2002)

     A. K. G. Asooociates (P) Ltd.           Vs   DCIT
     17/83, Than Singh Nagar,                     Central Circle-16
     Anand Parbat                                 New Delhi
     New Delhi
     AACCA0672P                                   (RESPONDENT)
     (APPELLANT)


                 Appellant by        None
                 Respondent by       Sh. R. C. Dande, Sr. DR

                   Date of Hearing             02.08.2017
                   Date of Pronouncement        04.08.2017

                                     ORDER

PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

The appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 12/1/2016 passed by CIT(A)-27, New Delhi.

2. At the time of hearing non for the assessee has appeared. The grounds of appeal are as under:-

"1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in the law the CIT(A) was incorrect and unjustified in :
a) Dismissing the appeal of the assessee.
b) Disposing the appeal without considering and disposing the each grounds of Appeal raised as per the grounds of Appeal taken in 2 IT(SS)A No. 5/Del/2016 Form 35.
c) Holding that the grounds have been considered whereas as per the appeal order the ground: have not been considered.
d) Holding and presuming that the assessee has nothing to appeal against the additions made by the Assessing Officer and also that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the Appeal proceedings pending.

2. The CIT(A) in incorrect and wrong in holding that nobody attended 02-11- 2010 in fact Bajrang Jain (Accountant)of the office of the CA attended and was told that a fresh notice would be sent 23.11.2010 In fact Bajrang Jain (Accountant) of the office of the CA attended and was told that a fresh notice would be sent. 10-03-2011 in fact Bajrang Jain (Accountant ) of the office of the CA attended and was told that a fresh notice would he sent. 17.04.2013 in fact Bajrang Jain (Accountant) of the office of the CA attended and was told that a fresh notice would be sent. 03.12.2013 in fact Bajrang Jain (Accountant) of the office of the CA attended and was told that a fresh notice would be sent. On 18.02.2014 in fact Bajrang Jain (Accountant) of the office of the CA attended and was told that a fresh notice would be sent. O On 30.10.2015 in fact Barjang Jain (Accountatn) of the office of the CA attened and was told that a fresh notice would be sent. On the last date of hearing i.e. on 11-01- 2016. In-fact Vishal Kumar (Article) of the office of the CA attended with adjournment application; the CIT(A) was not in office, her record keeper refused to adjourn the case and directed to come on the next date i.e. on 12-01-2016.

3. On 12-01-16 Bajrang Jain (Accountant) of the office of the CA went to the office of the CIT(A) also refused to call him in his office and refused the adjournment through his record keeper.

3. The Ld. DR submitted that the Assessing Officer has rightly made an addition on account of undisclosed income and regarding jewellery ad deposits in post office as well as bank. Therefore, the Ld. Dr submitted that the CIT(A) he has rightly after giving due opportunity to the assessee for 3 IT(SS)A No. 5/Del/2016 which the assessee fail to avail the opportunity before the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

4. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the CIT(A)'s order dated 12/1/2016.

From the perusal of the records, it can be seen that before the CIT(A) none appeared on behalf of the assessee. The CIT(A) decided the matter ex-parte without going into merits of the case. Therefore, in the interest of justice, this matter is remitted back to the CIT(A) for deciding all the issues on merit. Needless to say, proper hearing should be given to the assessee.

5. In result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 04th AUGUST, 2017.

          Sd/-                                                      Sd/-
     (R. K. PANDA)                                            (SUCHITRA KAMBLE)
     ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                        JUDICIAL MEMBER

     Dated:          04/08/2017
     R. Naheed *

     Copy forwarded to:

     1.                           Appellant
     2.                           Respondent
     3.                           CIT
     4.                           CIT(Appeals)
     5.                           DR: ITAT




                                                        ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
                                       4                        IT(SS)A No. 5/Del/2016


                                                      ITAT NEW DELHI



                                             Date

1.    Draft dictated on                   3/08/2017    PS

2.    Draft placed before author          3/08/2017    PS

3.    Draft proposed & placed before          .2017    JM/AM
      the second member

4.    Draft discussed/approved       by                JM/AM
      Second Member.

5.    Approved Draft comes to the                      PS/PS
      Sr.PS/PS                    4.08.2017

6.    Kept for pronouncement on                        PS

7.    File sent to the Bench Clerk        4.08.2017    PS

8.    Date on which file goes to the AR

9.    Date on which file goes to the
      Head Clerk.

10.   Date of dispatch of Order.
 5   IT(SS)A No. 5/Del/2016