Referred Sections:
Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act,
Section 234B of the Act.
Section 271(1)(c).

            IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                DELHI BENCH: `SMC' NEW DELHI

           BEFORE SHRI H. S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER

                         I.T.A. No. 1636/Del/2019
                        Assessment Year: 2010-11

NEERAJ GARG,                         VS.   ITO, WARD 34(4)
C-25, SHAKTI NAGAR EXTN.,                  NEW DELHI
NEW DELHI ­ 110 052
(PAN: AERPG7111H)
(ASSESSEE)                                    (RESPONDENT)

                        Assessee by: Sh. Ridhi Karan Aggarwal, CA
                        Revenue by: Ms. Ekta Vishnoi, Sr. DR.

                                  ORDER

     This appeal is filed by assessee against the Order dated 26.10.2018
passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-12, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year
2010-11 on the following grounds:-

           1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the
              reassessment proceedings concluded by the AO under
              section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and confirmed by
              the CIT(A) is without supplying the reasons for initiating
              the proceedings and hence, bad in law and void ab initio.
           2. That the CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in confirming
              the addition made by the AO aggregating Rs. 11,88,200/-
              for AY 2010-11 vide order dated 22.12.2017 passed under
              section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, without giving
              adequate    opportunity         to   the    appellant   to     make
              submissions.
           2.1   That the CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by upholding
                 the order of AO which was passed against the principle
                 of natural justice and hence, void.
           2.2   That    the   CIT(A)   has    erred     in   not   making    any
                 independent enquiry or asking for the received reports
                 for verification of facts, when he has got wide powers.
                                                                                     2






               3. That the CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by upholding the
                 exparte order passed by the AO.
               4. That the CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in not allowing
                 the    appellant    to     produce   the    relevant      supporting
                 documents      when      the   appellant   has         documents   to
                 substantiate       that sources of alleged cash              deposit
                 aggregating Rs. 11,88,200/- was out of the business
                 proceeds.
               5. That the AO erred on facts and in law in charging interest
                 under section 234B of the Act.
               6. That the AO has erred in law and facts initiating the
                 penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c).
               7. That the appellant craves, leaves to add, amend, and
                 delete any other grounds of appeal.

2.    Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both
the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of
brevity.

3.    During the hearing, Ld. counsel for the assessee has stated that Ld.
CIT(A)     has   not   given   sufficient   opportunity     to    the    assessee   for
substantiating the claim to      the assessee and passed the exparte order
without hearing the assessee.        He further stated that assessee is having
all the necessary evidences for substantiating the claim of the assesee.
Hence, he requested that the issues in dispute may be remitted back to
the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, as per law after
giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

4.    On the contrary, Ld. DR          relied upon the orders of the revenue
authorities.

5.    I have heard both the parties and perused the records especially
the orders of the revenue.        No doubt that the assessee remained non-
cooperative before the Ld. CIT(A).               Ld. Counsel for the assessee
undertakes to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and will cooperate in speedy
                                                                           3






disposal of the appeal as well as not seek any unnecessary adjournment
before the Ld. CIT(A). In the interest of justice, I set aside the issues in
dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for hearing on 13.01.2020 at
10.00 AM     with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving
adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.       It is made clear
that no notice for hearing will be issued by the Ld. CIT(A). Assessee is
also directed through its Counsel to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on
13.01.2020 at 10.00 AM for hearing to substantiate its case and did
not take any unnecessary adjournment in the case.

6.    In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for
statistical purposes.

       Order pronounced on 03/10/2019.
                                                            Sd/-

                                                      [H.S. SIDHU]
                                                   JUDICIAL MEMBER
Date 03/10/2019

"SRB"
Copy forwarded to: -

1.    Appellant -
2.    Respondent -
3.    CIT
4.    CIT (A)
5.    DR, ITAT          TRUE COPY
                                                      By Order,



                                  Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Delhi Benches
4