Case Number: ITA 5658/DEL/2019
Appellant: Sudesh Devi, Ghaziabad
Respondent: ITO, Ward-2(3), Ghaziabad
Assessment Year: 2010-11
Case Filed On: 2019-06-28
Order Type: Final Tribunal Order
Date of Order: 2021-02-23
Pronounced On: 2021-02-23
This case involves an appeal filed by Sudesh Devi, Ghaziabad, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Ghaziabad dated 31/03/2019. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2010-11 and was filed on 2019-06-28, with the final order pronounced on 2021-02-23.
Sudesh Devi, the appellant, is engaged in the business of trading in West Plastic Scrap and also derives income from bank interest and house property. An e-return of income for Assessment Year 2010-11 was filed on 6/10/2010, declaring an income of Rs. 2,87,748/-. However, based on information received from the CCIT (Central) New Delhi, the Assessing Officer (AO) noted that the assessee made cash purchases aggregating to Rs. 71,88,304/- from two entities during the Financial Year 2009-10. Consequently, the AO disallowed cash payments aggregating to Rs. 8,73,400/- against the purchases under Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and added the same to the income of the assessee.
The grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are as follows:
The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without addressing the jurisdictional issues related to valid reasons not recorded in respect of the order u/s 147/143(3). These grounds were taken as Ground No. 2(a), 2(b), 2(c), 2(d), and 2(e).
The Ld. AR (Appellant’s Representative) submitted that the jurisdictional issue related to valid reasons not recorded in respect of the order u/s 147/143(3) was not discussed or decided by the CIT(A) in her appellate order. Therefore, the Ld. AR requested that the said grounds be decided first by the CIT(A) and that the matter be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A).
The Ld. DR (Respondent’s Representative) relied upon the order of the CIT(A) and the assessment order.
The Tribunal, comprising Accountant Member Shri N. K. Billaiya and Judicial Member Ms. Suchitra Kamble, heard both parties and perused the material available on record. The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had not decided the jurisdictional/legal issues as contemplated by the Ld. AR. Therefore, it deemed it appropriate to remand the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding the same. The Tribunal directed that the assessee be given an opportunity of hearing by following the principles of natural justice. The appeal of the assessee was partly allowed for statistical purposes.
The appeal filed by Sudesh Devi was partly allowed for statistical purposes. The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for deciding the jurisdictional and legal issues that were not addressed in the original appellate order. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following the principles of natural justice and providing the assessee with an opportunity of hearing.
Order pronounced in the Open Court in the presence of both parties on 23rd February 2021.
Signed by:
(N. K. BILLAIYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
(SUCHITRA KAMBLE) JUDICIAL MEMBER
Date: 23rd February 2021
Copy forwarded to:
// BY Order //
Assistant Registrar, ITAT New Delhi Benches, New Delhi
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform