Infraction of section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act

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

BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.1469/Del/2020
Assessment Year : 2010-11

Seema Chauhan,
440, Defence Colony, Hisar,
Haryana-125001.
PAN-AGEPC5627R
APPELLANT 

vs 

ITO,
Ward-4,
Hisar.
RESPONDENT

Appellant by Sh. Lalit Mohan, CA
Respondent by Sh.Gaurav Pundir, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 19.07.2021
Date of Pronouncement 23.07.2021

ORDER

PER KUL BHARAT, JM :

This appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2010-11 is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Hisar dated 28.02.2019. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-

1. "That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Hisar has erred both in law and, on facts in upholding the determination of income made by the learned Income Tax, Officer, Ward-4, Hisar of the appellant at Rs.17,68,200/- in an order of assessment dated 22.12.20179 U/S 144/143(3)/147 of the Act.

2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred both in law and on facts in disposing off the appeal exparte without granting any fair opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 

2.1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that there was reasonable cause for theappellant for not causing appearance on the dates fixed forhearing and as such disposal of the appeal without grantingfair, meaningful and proper opportunity is untenable.

2.2. That even otherwise, an order passed in limini withouteffectively disposing of the grounds raised by the appellant is ininfraction of section 250(6) of the Act and as such, order so made is otherwise too illegal, invalid and a vitiated order.

3. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has grossly erred both in law and on facts in upholding the initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Act and, completion of assessment under section 144/147/143(3) of the Act withoutappreciating that the same were without jurisdiction and hence deserved to be quashed as such.

4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has also erred both in law and on facts in sustaining an addition of Rs.15,79,800/- representing cash deposits in the bank account of the appellant maintained with ICICI Bank Ltd.”

2. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the case of the assessee was re-opened on the ground of cash deposited in the bankaccount. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer proceeded for framing the assessment u/s 144 r.w.s. 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”) and made addition of Rs.15,79,800/- against the income declared by the assessee at Rs.1,88,400/-. 

To know more in details find the attachment file