VIJAYKUMAR VARADHAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORP. CIRCLE 14(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 920/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 October 2023AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restored the issue back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to re-consider the issue after hearing the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a doctor, had his assessment completed at a higher income than initially declared. The case was revised under Section 263, leading to further additions by the AO. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A), resulting in an ex parte order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was sustainable when passed ex parte without proper adjudication, and if the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE & SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE

Hearing: 17.10.2023

आदेश / O R D E R PER MANJUNATHA.G, AM:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 26.06.2023, and pertains to assessment years 2014-15.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Doctor running a dental clinic under the name & style of M/s.Dentistree. The assessee has filed his return of income for AY 2014-15 on 16.12.2014 admitting a taxable income of Rs.20,94,410/-. The assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act") on 19.12.2016 and total income was assessed at Rs.39,99,330/-. The case has been subsequently taken up for revision proceedings u/s.263 of the Act, and remitted the issue back to the file of the AO to re-do the assessment. The AO has passed assessment order u/s.143(3) r.w.s.263 of the Act, on 11.07.2019 and determined total income of Rs.86,05,531/- by making addition towards difference between the gross salary received from M/s.Dentistree (I) Pvt. Ltd., and the amount of income which was admitted by the assessee. The AO had also made addition towards salary received from M/s.Eyeball Media India Ltd. The AO further made additions towards amount received from M/s.Eyeball Media India Ltd., amounting to Rs.19,09,111/- u/s.69A of the Act.

3.

Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee neither appeared nor filed any details which is evident from Para No.3.3 of the order of the Ld.CIT(A), where, the Ld.CIT(A) has given number of opportunities to the assessee. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) disposed off the appeal filed by the assessee and sustained the additions made by the AO towards difference between salary income received from M/s.Eyeball Media India Ltd., and amount received from M/s.Eyeball Media India Ltd., u/s.69A of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.

4.

None appeared for the assessee. We have heard the Ld.DR, Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT, and perused the materials available on record.

The Bench has pointed out the ex parte order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) to the Ld.DR and also apprised the non-speaking order passed by the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.DR fairly agreed that the issue may be set aside to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Since, the Ld.CIT(A) has passed ex parte order and also confirmed the additions made by the AO towards various incomes without discussing, how additions made by the AO, is sustainable, we are of the considered view that the issue needs to go back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Thus, we set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the issue back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) and direct the Ld.CIT(A) to re-consider the issue after hearing the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee shall appear before the Ld.CIT(A) without seeking any adjournment.

5.

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

Order pronounced on the 17th day of October, 2023, in Chennai.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →