Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Ashok Kumar Gupta, New Delhi vs Dcit, New Delhi on 4 August, 2017
1 IT (SS)A No. 3/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.3/DEL/2016 (A.Y 1/4/1996 to 7/5/2002)
Ashok Kumar Gupta Vs DCIT
17/83, Than Singh Nagar Central Circle-16
Anand Parbat New Delhi
New Delhi
AALPG4014H (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 none appeared for the assessee. Since the CIT(A) passed ex-parte order, the matter is taken up for hearing. 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 2 IT (SS)A No. 3/Del/2016 grounds of Appeal raised as per the grounds of Appeal taken in 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 on 30/10/2015. In fact Bajrang Jain (Accountant) of the C.A attended and was told that a fresh notice would be sent. On the lat date of hearing i..e. on 11/1/2016. 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 12/1/2016.
3. on 12/1/2016, Bajrang Jain (Accountant) of the office of the CA went to the office of the CIT(A) with an adjournment application which was refused and 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. Therefore, the Ld. DR submitted that after giving due opportunity to the assessee for which the assessee failed to avail the opportunity before the CIT(A)he has rightly 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.
3 IT (SS)A No. 3/Del/2016Needless 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
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
4 IT (SS)A No. 3/Del/2016
Sr.PS/PS 4.07.2017
6. Kept for pronouncement on PS
7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 4.07.2017 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.