Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.28 seconds)
Documents citing Sh. Sandeep Kumar Aggarwal, New Delhi vs Ito, New Delhi on 13 December, 2017

Sh.Sandeep Kaushik,Dehradun vs Ito, W- 1(3), Dehradun on 18 July, 2025

5. We have heard the Department's Representative and perused the material available on record. Both the order of the A.O. as well as order of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in any of the proceedings and even the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de- novo assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment order in 3 ITA No. 8/DDN/2025 Sh. Sandeep Kaushik Vs. ITO accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Dehradun Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shri Sushil Kumar Bardia , Kolkata vs Pr.Cit-12, Kolkata on 22 November, 2019

14. The Ld. AR drew our attention to a similar case which came up before the Delhi Tribunal in the case of Sandeep Kr. Aggarwal Vs. ITO in ITA No. 2321/Del/2014 for AY 2009-10 wherein a similar case the Tribunal after taking note of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in Pr. CIT Vs. Delhi Airport Metro Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 705/2017 dated 05.09.2017 wherein the Hon'ble Delhi High Court held that where the AO has made enquiries regarding the issue for which the revision has been made by the Ld. CIT, the assessment order cannot be termed as erroneous (since enquiry has been done by AO) unless it is not in accordance with the law. It was further held that the Ld. CIT has not made any enquiry himself on that issue on which the AO has already enquired during assessment proceedings, which exercise is necessary for him to establish and show the error or mistake made by the AO. So, when the AO discharges his duty as that of the investigator on an issue and make enquiries and thereafter as an adjudicator accepts the claim of the assessee, then the Ld. CIT cannot hold the action of AO as erroneous, unless he himself enquires and records a finding that AO's satisfaction/finding is unsustainable in law and such finding of Ld. CIT must be clear, unambiguous and not debatable. We note that in the present case in hand, the AO had issued notice u/s. 142(1) dated 12.11.2015 wherein he has called for complete party-wise details of all purchases and sales above Rs. 1 lac and the complete postal address and PAN of the parties involved as well as complete party-wise details involving sundry debtors and creditors mentioning complete postal address and PAN of the parties and pursuant to which the assessee had furnished the complete details of the sundry creditors involving name, amounting to Rs.2,11,05,222/- and the AO has recorded in the assessment order that he has examined and made enquiries u/s. 133(6) of the Act on test check basis in respect of the transactions. Thus, according to us, it is not a case of no enquiry carried out by the AO during the assessment proceedings. It has to be kept in mind that the AO has dual role while framing the assessment order. He has to be an investigator as well as an adjudicator. In case, if the AO fails in any of these roles then the order of the AO would be vitiated and will be held to be erroneous.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1