Tally
coaching
CA Classes

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

ITAT: In view of reasonable cause for failure to attend the hearing by the Authorised Representative, the assessee should not be penalized

LinkedIn


Court :
ITAT Delhi

Brief :
This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 10/10/2019 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ghaziabad [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2010-11 raising following grounds:

Citation :
ITA No.14/Del/2020

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC-1’ NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
[Through Video Conferencing]

ITA No.14/Del/2020
Assessment Year: 2010-11

Smt. Mamta Goel,
Ch. No. 206-297, Ansal
Satyam, RDC, Raj Nagar,
Ghaziabad
PAN :AGNPG1969K
(Appellant) 

Vs. 

ITO,
Ward-1(4),
Ghaziabad
(Respondent) 

Appellant by Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate
Respondent by Shri R.K. Gupta, Sr.DR

Date of hearing 01.07.2021
Date of pronouncement 01.07.2021

ORDER

PER O.P. KANT, AM:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 10/10/2019 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ghaziabad [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2010-11 raising following grounds:

1. Because, order of Ld. CIT(Appeals) is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Because Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-party without providing proper opportunity of being heard as assessee was prevented with sufficient cause in not appearing on the date of hearing.

3. Because, ld. CIT(A) further erred in disposing appeal hurriedly and summarily dismissed all the grounds of appeal even without considering the merits of each ground with material on record which is against settled law.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that in view of the information received of cash deposit of ₹ 12,38,000/- in saving bank account and investment made in purchase of immovable property amounting to ₹ 53,42,000/- during the year under consideration, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment by way of issue notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). In response, the assessee filed return of income, however, no compliance was made of subsequent statutory notices issued under the Act and therefore the assessment was completed in terms of section 144 (best judgement assessment on the basis of available material) of the Act read with section 147 of the Act after making addition of ₹ 65,80,000/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), however, due to non-compliance before her also, the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed. Aggrieved, the assessee is before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (in short ‘the Tribunal’) raising the grounds as reproduced above.

3. Before us, the parties appeared through Video Conferencing facility. The assessee filed a paper-book containing affidavit of the Authorized Representative, who appeared before the Learned First Appellate Authority. 

To know more in details find the attachment file

 

Guest
on 13 July 2021
Published in Income Tax
Views : 26
downloaded 1 times
Report Abuse

LinkedIn







Trending Tags