2021 (7) TMI 1016

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed order. 3. That the Honourable ITAT, Delhi Benches, 'G' New Delhi has communicated its appeal order at D-162, Sector 10, Noida-201301 as mentioned therein. 4. That the learned CIT(A) -28, has sent all the notices at the old address i.e. LG 1 & 3, R-23, Nehru Enclave, New Delhi-110019 and the same remain unserved. So no reasonable opportunity was given to the assessee company. 5. That the appeal has been filed after getting the certified copy of the order from the Learned Income Tax officer, Ward 23(2), New Delhi. 6. That the Learned Assessing Officer has made an addition of Rs. 8,85,13,245/- for increase in the assets of the assessee company. As such he erred in the making the addition u/s. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... making addition of Rs. 8,95,13,245/- Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Learned CIT(A), however, same has been dismissed due to non-representation by the assessee. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee before us also. But a written request has been filed by Sh. Anup Kumar claiming to be Insolvency Professional of Shivkala Developers Private Limited, wherein he requested for adjournment of the appeal. However, looking to ex parte order of the Learned CIT(A), we have heard the Learned Departmental Representative and perused the relevant material on record and proceeded to adjudicate the appeal. 4. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee observing as under: "4. I have considered the grounds r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s in the appeal as he thinks fit". In the instant case there is enough ground of non appearance of the appellant to decide the matter ex-parte, the appeal is decided on the basis of material available on record. 5. Ground no 1 and 2 taken by the appellant is general in nature. During the course of the appellate proceeding even after been given reasonable opportunity the appellant has failed to explain how the order passed was without jurisdiction, contrary to law. Therefore ground no 1 and 2 taken by the appellant is dismissed. 6. Ground no 3 taken by the appellant is against (1) addition of Rs. 8,85,13,425/made by the assessing officer under section 68 of the Act and (ii) Addition of Rs. 10,00,000 made by the assessing officer under se....