ARUN MANIVANNAN NAMACHIVAYAM,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 494/CHNY/2020Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 September 2022AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without addressing the issues, which was found contrary to settled legal position.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2015-16 was filed with a significant delay. The assessee claimed the impugned order came to their knowledge only when their bank account was blocked.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating on merits due to the assessee's non-appearance, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

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

For Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) – Ld. DR

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2015- 16 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax

2 - (Appeals)-4, Chennai [CIT(A)] dated 26.03.2019 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 129 of the Act on 27.12.2017. In the assessment order, the assessee has been saddled with additions under the head capital gains and addition of undisclosed cash deposit in bank account.

2.

The Registry has noted a delay of 282 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of condonation petition as accompanied by an affidavit of the assessee. It has been submitted that the impugned order came to knowledge only when the bank account was blocked by the department. The Ld. AR pleaded for condonation of delay and submitted that the impugned order has not adjudicated the issues on merits. The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to attend appellate proceedings. Having heard rival submissions, the appeal is disposed-off as under.

3.

Upon perusal of impugned order, we find that the assessee failed to attend appellate proceedings. However, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without addressing the issues on merits which is contrary to settled legal position. Therefore, we condone the delay and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits by way of speaking order with a direction to the assessee to substantiate his case. Needless to add that adequate opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee.

3 -

4.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 28th September, 2022.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →