TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 1018X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the relevant evidence are available with the record. We are of the considered view that due to failure of the assessee’s counsel and due to unavoidable circumstances for non-producing the relevant evidence and non-appearance before the Revenue Authorities, assessee should not be suffered. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the issue in dispute is set aside De novo to the AO to decide the same afresh, under the law, after giving full opportunity to the assessee of being heard for substantiating its claim. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. - I.T.A. No. 2057/DEL/2013 - - - Dated:- 19-6-2015 - Shri H.S.Sidhu and Shri J.S. Reddy, JJ. For the Petitioner : Sh. V.K. Goel, Adv. Mrs. Swati Jindal, CA Fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. CIT(A) has not given any finding. 4. That the assessee has right to add, delete or modify any grounds during the appeal proceeding. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its income tax return declaring loss of ₹ 1,71,794/- and the assessment was completed on the total income of ₹ 16 lacs by the AO by making the addition of ₹ 16 lacs on account of Sale of Share Application Money from Mls. Kuberco Sales Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Sparow Marketing Pvt. Ltd. The AO ignored the various case laws and ignored the loss while computing the total income of the assessee. The assessee has also filed Application u/s. 154 of the I.T. Act to rectify the mistake, but without considering the evidence filed by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lied upon the order passed by the revenue authorities and stated that the assessee has not produced any evidence before the AO as well as before the Ld. CIT(A) and he opposed the request of the assessee for setting aside the issue before the AO. He further stated that these two companies namely M/s. Kuberco Sales Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Sparow Marketing Pvt. Ltd. are the purchasers of the shares and these companies have already declared non-existence in the various cases including one case decided by the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Navodaya Castels (P) Ltd. [2014] 50 taxmann.com 110 (Delhi). This judgment of the Hon ble High Court has already been upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Navod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... That in the above case my husband late Shri Ravi Kiran Jindal, Advocate was looking after the entire income tax matters of the company. 3. That my husband passed away on 19th February 2011, thereafter all family members were disturbed and Smt. Swati Jindal (Daughter in Law) had no exposure to the Income tax hearings so was unable to argue the case. 4. That all the proceedings before the AO was done by Kshitija Narwane Advocate who was the existing employee of late Shri. Ravi Kiran Jindal and during that time she was dealing in Sales Tax matters only. 5. That Mrs. Kshitija appeared before AO, but due to lack of sufficient knowledge relating to income tax matters she was unable to pursue the proceedings efficiently. 6 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty of being heard is given to the assessee which is against natural-justice. 7. That to meet justice it is required to give another opportunity of being heard before AO. 8. That the assessee will feel obliged if the case will set aside to the A.O. to produce evidence desired by AO. Swati Jindal (Chartered Accountant) W/o Abhishek Jindal do hereby certify that all the information provided above are true to best of my knowledge and belief. This affidavit is made on the 17th day of June, 2015. 8. No doubt the assessee remained non-cooperative before the AO as well as Ld. CIT(A), but after the reading of the affidavits filed by Smt. Sunita Jindal, W/o Late Shri Ravi Kiran Jindal and Smt. Swati Jindal, CA, Daughter in Law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
