Assessee appeals that the Ld.CIT(A)-XII has dismissed the appeal without affording proper opportunity to the assessee

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI “SMC-1” BENCH: NEW DELHI
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)

BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.576/Del/2020
Assessment Year : 2011-12

Kanwal Malhotra,
48, GTB Nagar, Tagore Park,
Delhi-110009.
PAN-AGAPM8392B
APPELLANT 

vs 

ITO,
Ward-36(1),
New Delhi.
RESPONDENT

Appellant by Sh. A.K.Taneja, CA
Respondent by Sh. R.K.Gupta, Sr.DR

Date of Hearing 08.04.2021
Date of Pronouncement 18.05.2021

ORDER

PER KUL BHARAT, JM :

This appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12 is directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-12, New Delhi dated 27.11.2019.

2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

1. “That Ld.CIT(A)-XII erred in confirming the addition made by assessing authority without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. That the Ld.CIT(A-XII has dismissed the appeal without affording proper opportunity to the assessee. That the assessee has not received any notice by post or by hand.

3. That Ld.CIT(A)-XII has passed Order without serving any statutory notice is bad in law and against the principal of natural justice and be quashed ab-initio.” 

3. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that AIR information was received in respect of assesse that during the Financial Year 2010-11 relevant to Assessment Year 2011-12, contractual receipts of Rs.2,25,341/-, sales/purchase of shares for Rs.25,47,470/- and investment of Rs.8,00,000/- in mutual fund have been done by the assessee, but has not filed return of income. Reason for escapement of income was recorded by ITO, Ward 41(4) and the assessment was re-opened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for Assessment Year 2011-12. A notice u/s 148 of Act was issued on 26.03.2018. Further, statutory notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 29.09.2018 was issued, to file reply as per the questionnaire attached with the notice. However, no reply was received from the assessee. Therefore, a show-cause notice dated 09.10.2018 was issued to the assessee and again no reply was received. Despite issuance of several notices, no compliance was made. The Assessing Officer, therefore, proceeded to frame best judgement thereby, assessee income at Rs.17,56,335/-.

4. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A). Before him also, there was no representation on behalf of the assessee, therefore, he proceeded to dispose of the appeal on the basis of material available on record, thereby, he partly allowed the appeal.

5. At the outset, it is contended on behalf of the assessee there he was not afforded opportunity to represent his case before the Ld.CIT(A). He further submitted that the Assessing Officer passed a best judgement order as the assessee could not appear before him. He submitted that even Ld.CIT(A) did not give opportunity of hearing. He prayed that last opportunity may be granted and assessment be restored to the Assessing Officer.

6. On the contrary, Ld. DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue opposed these submissions. He submitted that the assessee was grossly negligent and no interference is called for.

7. I have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is noticed that there was no representation before the authorities below. Considering the fact that no prejudice shall cause to the Revenue if the assessee is given opportunity to represent his case before the Ld.CIT(A) to subserve the interest of principles of natural justice. I, therefore, set aside the order of Ld.CIT(A) and restore the grounds of appeal to the Ld.CIT(A for decision afresh. The assessee is hereby directed that he would not seek any adjournment. Ld.CIT(A) would give reasonable opportunity to both assessee and the Assessing Officer while deciding the appeal. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.

8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

 Above decision was pronounced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing in the presence of both the parties on 18th May, 2021.

 Sd/-
 (KUL BHARAT)
 JUDICIAL MEMBER 

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

 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
ITAT, NEW DELHI