PANKAJ KUMAR & CO,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 31/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 February 2023AY 2017-182 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. This was done to provide another opportunity for hearing to the assessee, adhering to the principle of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution as they failed to make submissions despite multiple opportunities. The assessment itself was framed under Section 144 with an addition for unexplained investment during demonetization.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) after failing to do so previously.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C/SMC’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आदेश / O R D E R

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 13-12-2022 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.144 of the Act on 26-12-2019.

2.

The Ld. AR, at the outset, pleaded for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. Upon perusal of case records, it could be seen that the assessee has been assessed u/s. 144 of the Act on 26-12-2019 wherein it was saddled with addition of unexplained investment u/s. 69 of the Act for Rs.10.74 Lacs being cash deposits during demonetization period.

2 - Though the assessee preferred further appeal before Ld. CIT(A), however, it failed to make any submissions despite various opportunities as noted by Ld. CIT(A) in para 3.1 of the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed for non prosecution. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before me.

3.

I find that though the assessee has remained negligent in attending the first appellate proceedings, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, I deem it fit to prove another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Therefore, the appeal stand restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate his stand failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with adjudication on the basis of material on record.

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 21st February, 2023.

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →