ITO, WARD - 3 (2), TRICHY vs. C.ANAND, TRICHY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2189/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 August 2023AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issues back to the AO for de novo assessment, allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee was directed to provide all necessary details.

What were the facts?

The assessment was framed ex-parte by the AO without providing an opportunity to the assessee. The CIT(A) confirmed some additions and deleted others, admitting additional evidence without giving the AO a chance to examine it. Both the assessee and revenue filed appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment was valid and whether additional evidence was rightly admitted by the CIT(A) without providing an opportunity to the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

Hearing: 03.08.2023Pronounced: 03.08.2023

These cross appeals by the Revenue and assessee, are arising out of order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy in dated 03.05.2019. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(2), Trichy, for the assessment year 2013-14 u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) vide order dated 31.12.2018.

2.

At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee as well as ld. Senior DR both agreed that the assessment framed by the AO is ex- parte and no opportunity was provided to the assessee before framing of assessment in the case of the assessee. The following are the additions made by the AO:- Returned Income Rs.4,79,610/- Addition 1 Unexplained cash credit in the current Rs.39,57,340/- account of the Firm “M/s. Hotel Sona’s”, as discussed above. Addition 2 Income from money lending business as Rs.4,66,767/- discussed above Addition 3 Unexplained gift, as discussed above Rs.18,00,000/- Addition 4 Unexplained cash deposits in the bank Rs.51,15,100/- accounts, as discussed above Assessed income Rs.1,18,18,817/- The assessee challenged these additions and the CIT(A) confirmed the additions of unexplained cash credit in the current

3 & 2192/Chny/2019 account of the firm M/s. Hotel Sona’s amounting to Rs.39,57,340/- and interest income from money lending business to the extent of Rs.72,042/- as against addition made by AO of Rs.4,66,767/-. The assessee came in appeal on these two additions and Revenue has challenged the deletion of addition on account of interest income i.e., balance interest income after reducing Rs.72,042/- and also unexplained gift of Rs.18 lakhs and unexplained cash deposit in the bank account at Rs.51,15,100/-. The ld.Senior DR took us through the order of CIT(A) and stated that the CIT(A) has admitted the additional evidences in violation of Rule 46(A) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 without providing opportunity to the AO to examine the additional evidences furnished by assessee. Hence, he requested for in entirety, the matter has to go back to the file of the AO i.e., additions sustained by CIT(A) as well as additions deleted by CIT(A). Hence, according to him, assessment has to be set aside denovo for providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee and for reframing the assessment. He also mentioned that the assessee been directed to appear before AO and file all evidences as required by the AO.

4.

On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee agreed for the above proposal and he undertook before the Bench that the

5.

After hearing both the sides and going through the entirety of facts, we are inclined to restore these issues raised by Revenue and assessee in their cross appeals back to the file of the AO, who will reframe the assessment denovo after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to provide all the necessary details for completion of assessment as early as possible. In term of the above, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd August, 2023 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →