What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal set aside the impugned order, deeming it not a speaking order and restoring the assessment to the AO for de-novo assessment. The assessee was directed to substantiate their claim, adhering to the principle of natural justice.

The assessee sought a stay of recovery of demand for AY 2017-18, arguing that the assessment and appellate orders were ex-parte and that bank deposits were gifts from relatives. The assessee had not filed a return or attended proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte assessment and appellate order, passed without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee, should be set aside to allow for a fresh assessment.

Mr. S. Tamilselvam vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “सी” �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय �ी महावीर िसंह, उपा� एवं माननीय �ी मनोज कुमार अ%वाल ,लेखा सद( के सम । BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & Stay Application No.40/Chny/2023 (In (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri S. Tamilselvam ITO बनाम No.22, Main Road Kannagapattu, Non-Corporate Ward-22(5), Thirupporur, Chengalpattu, Tambaram, Chennai-600 045. / Vs. Kancheepuram-603 110. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. APFPT-3733-H (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Ms. J. Vamini (Advocate)-Ld.AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri D. Hema Bhupal(JCIT)-Ld. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 20-10-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 20-10-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

By way of captioned stay petition, the assessee seeks recovery of outstanding demand for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessment order as well as appellate order is ex- parte orders. The Ld. AR submitted that deposits in the bank account was nothing but gifts received by the assessee from relatives and therefore, the same could not be added in the hands of the assessee. In the said background, Ld. AR prayed for stay of recovery of outstanding demand and also sought another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities.

The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, submitted that the assessee failed to attend proceedings before lower authorities and therefore, the assessee do not deserve any stay. However, Ld. Sr. DR concurred that the appeal itself may be disposed-off by issuing appropriate directions. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is evident that impugned order is not a speaking order and the appeal has been dismissed for want of sufficient evidences from assessee. The assessee has not filed return of income and did not attend assessment proceedings as well as appellate proceedings. Keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to provide another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the assessment is restored back to the file of Ld. AO. The Ld. AO shall make de-novo assessment and the assessee is directed to substantiate its claim. 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. The stay application stand dismissed as infructuous. Order pronounced on 20th October, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा23 / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद5 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे7ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 20-10-2023 DS आदेशकीAितिलिपअ%ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु?/CIT 4. भागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडDफाईल/GF

MR. S. TAMILSELVAM,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORPRATE WARD 22(5), CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments