Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Sonia Sharma, Delhi vs Assessee on 1 January, 2016
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH: 'C' NEW DELHI
BEFORE SMT DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SH.O.P.KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
I.T.A .No.-5528 to 5530/Del/2015
(ASSESSMENT YEAR-2009-10 to 2011-12)
Sonia Sharma, vs ACIT,
26/58, West Patel Nagar, Central Circle-3,
Delhi-110008 New Delhi
PAN-AARPS7234B
(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)
Appellant by Sh.V.K.Tulsian, CA
Respondent by Sh.Yatendra Singh, Sr.DR
Date of Hearing 17.11.2015
Date of Pronouncement 01.01.2016
ORDER
PER DIVA SINGH, JM
These three appeals are being decided by a common order for the sake of convenience as facts, circumstances and arguments of the parties before the Bench remained identical in each of these appeals. By the present appeals, the assessee assails the correctness of the separate orders dated 21.07.2015 of CIT(A)-XXVI, New Delhi pertaining to 2009-10 to 2011-12 assessment years on the various grounds including Ground No.1 which is found to be identical in all the three appeals. The same is reproduced hereunder from ITA No.5528/Del/2015:-
1. "Whether the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in upholding the A.O. order just in mechanical way, due to non appearance and non filing of submission, even without appreciating the statement of facts available on the record and particularly neither iota of evidence nor was any tangible evidence brought on record out of the search operation to substantiate the additions."
2. The Ld.AR inviting attention to the impugned order submitted that an ex-
parte order has been passed by the CIT(A) making reference to various dates on which the assessee was stated to have been found to be not represented. It was I.T.A .No.-5528 to 5530/Del/2015 his submission that perusal of the impugned order would show that on most of these dates an adjournment had been sought by the assessee and ultimately on the last date of hearing, the appeals were dismissed in limine holding that the assessee is not serious in pursuing the present appeal by separate orders dated 21.07.2015.
2.1. Addressing the reasons for non-appearance and seeking time it was submitted that the assessee was an individual whose premises were utilized by persons connected with "Stock Guru India" and who had been searched. It was submitted that since the file of the assessee and the relevant papers remained with the other people and their counsel and the assessee lady did not have the requisite documents she was unable to make any effective representation and thus was frequently seeking an adjournment. It was his submission that in the facts of the present case, the assessee is serious in pursuing the appeals and the additions made therein and only since the peculiar facts where the relevant documents were not available with her time had been sought. The Ld.AR gave his oral undertaking that in the eventuality the appeals are restored, the assessee would be in a position to make an effective representation and the issues may be restored back to the file to the CIT(A) in order to afford an opportunity of being heard.
3. The Ld. Sr. DR did not oppose the request so made.
4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. On a consideration of the same, we are of the view that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order deserves to be set aside as it does not meet the statutory requirements as set out in sub- section (6) of section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Statute mandates that the CIT(A) while deciding the appeal is to set out pointing for determination arising out of the grounds and the pleadings and reasons for his conclusion, we find that the said exercise in each of these three appeals is missing. Accordingly, in view of the above and taking into consideration the oral undertaking given by the Ld. AR that the assessee would make an effective compliance before the CIT(A), we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order and restore the issues back to the Ld. CIT(A) taking into consideration the submissions shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law after giving the Page 2 of 3 I.T.A .No.-5528 to 5530/Del/2015 assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. It is hoped that the opportunity so provided is effectively utilized by the assessee and the trust reposed is not abused. We make it clear that in the eventuality the assessee does not make any effective compliance, the Ld. CIT(A) would be at liberty to pass a speaking order in accordance with law on the basis of material available on record. The said order was pronounced in the presence of the parties in the open Court.
5. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open court on 01st of January, 2016.
Sd/- Sd/-
(O.P.KANT) (DIVA SINGH)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 01/01/2016
*Amit Kumar*
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT NEW DELHI
Page 3 of 3