Sartaj Hotels apartments and Villas Pvt. Ltd.,, New Delhi v. Addll. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 4806/DEL/2009 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 480620114 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AABCS1580P
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 4806/DEL/2009
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 3 day(s)
Appellant Sartaj Hotels apartments and Villas Pvt. Ltd.,, New Delhi
Respondent Addll. CIT, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 24-02-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 24-02-2010
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 21-12-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH G DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI I. P. BANSAL JM SHRI K. D. RANJ AN AM I. T. APPEAL NO. 4806 (DEL) OF 2009. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07. M/S. SARTAJ HOTELS APARTMENTS ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND VILLAS PVT. LTD. CELEBRATIONS GARDEN NH - 8 VS. R A N G E : 7 ADJOINING SHIV MURTI RANGPURI N E W D E L H I. N E W D E L H I. P A N / G I R NO. AAB CS 1580 P. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI P. N. CHAWLA C. A.; DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI B. K. GUPTA SR. D. R.; O R D E R. PER K. D. RANJAN AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 06-07 ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-X NEW DEL HI. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE REA D AS FOLLOWS :- ' 1. THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) IS CONTRARY TO LAW AND FACTS ON RECORDS; 2. THAT THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) HAS WRONG LY REJECTED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE INCOME OF RS.20 90 640/- SHOW N AS AGRICULTURAL 2 I. T. APPEAL NO. 4806 (DEL) OF 2009. INCOME I.E. SALE OF FLOWER. A SUM OF RS.2 25 700/- WAS SPENT AS EXPENSES WHICH WAS ALSO NOT ALLOWED. THUS TOTAL INCOME FRO M AGRICULTURAL WAS RS.18 64 940/- INSTEAD OF RS.20 90 640/- WAS DISALL OWED BY THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) IS HIGHLY ARBITRARY EXCESSIVE AND UNJUST ; 3. THAT THE LAND USE OF THE AGRICULTURAL LAND WAS CHANGED TO COMMERCIAL AND IT WAS NOT NECESSARY TO INFORM THE P ATWARI TO COMPLETE THE FARD AND BASING THE ORDER ON THE FARD IS WRONG UNJ UST AND AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE; 4. THAT THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE TO ADDL. CIT T O DEPUTE THE INCOME-TAX INSPECTOR TO VISIT THE PREMISES WAS NOT TAKEN CARE OF AND THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REJECTED WITHOUT PROVIDIN G OPPORTUNITY IS ARBITRARY UNJUST AND ILLEGAL; 5. THAT THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) HAS WRONG LY REJECTED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT PROVIDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEA RD AS THE DATE OF HEARING WAS FIXED ON 28/10/2009 AND WAS ADJOURNED T O 30/10/2009. ON THAT DATE THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) WAS NOT PRESENT AND THE ADVOCATE'S MUNSHI WAS VISITING THE OFFICE OF THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) RE GULARLY AND IN SPITE OF THIS THE CASE HAS BEEN COMPLETED EX-PARTE WITHOUT HEARING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. ' 3. AT THE OUTSET THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 30TH OCTOBER 2009. THE LD. CIT (AP PEALS) WAS NOT PRESENT ON THIS DATE. HOWEVER EX-PARTE ORDER HAS BEEN MADE ON 27TH OCTOB ER 2009. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS HOWEVER DECIDED THE ISSUE ON THE BASIS OF LETTER D ATED 19TH MAY 2009. SINCE THE LD. CIT (A) HAS PASSED ORDER WITHOUT HEARING THE ASSESSEE IT H AS BEEN REQUESTED THAT THE APPEAL MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A) FOR DECIDI NG THE APPEAL AFTER AFFORDING THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. ON THE OTHE R HAND THE LD. SR. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (APPEALS). 3 I. T. APPEAL NO. 4806 (DEL) OF 2009. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. FROM THE APPELL ATE ORDER WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF LE TTER DATED 19/05/2009 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT 'PRIOR TO THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHO WN ANY AGRICULTURAL INCOME'. THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED FROM 28TH OCTOBER 2009 TO 30TH OCTOBER 2009. HOWEVER FROM THE APPELLATE ORDER WE FIND THAT THE DATE OF FINAL HEARING HAS BEEN MENTIONED AS 27TH OCTOBER 2009. FROM THESE FACTS IT IS APPA RENT THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL EX-PARTE WITHOUT PROVIDING PROPER OPPORTUNIT Y OF BEING HEARD. WE THEREFORE SET ASIDE THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT (A) WITH THE DIRECTION THAT PROPER OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN HIS CASE. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON : 24TH FEBRUARY 2010. SD/- SD/- [ I. P. BANSAL ] [ K. D. RANJAN ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 24TH FEBRUARY 2010. *MEHTA * COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : - 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT. 3. CIT 4. CIT (APPEALS) 5. DR ITAT NEW DELHI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT. 4 I. T. APPEAL NO. 4806 (DEL) OF 2009. 5 I. T. APPEAL NO. 4806 (DEL) OF 2009.