KUTHETHUR KALYANI DAS,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-3(4), CHENNAI

Assessment Years: 2012-13 Kuthethur Kalyani Das, Income Tax Officer, 1b, Anu Apts, Non-Corporate Ward-3(4), No.69 C Spurtank Road, Chennai. Chetpet, Chennai-600 031. [PAN: BUIPK5930L] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Shri D.Anand, Advocate, प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 05.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : .06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 / 1073627293(1) dated 24.02.2025 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment year 2012-13. The reference to the word “Act” in this order hereinafter shall mean the Income Tax Act, 1961 as amended from time to time.

2.0 At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld.AO has made an addition of short time capital gains of Rs.4,75,10,143/- by disturbing the cost of acquisition in the hands of assessee. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has also confirmed the order of the Ld.AO on the premise of non-compliance by the assessee. The Ld. Counsel however pleaded that its non- compliances before the Ld. CIT(A) may be excused as the assessee was preoccupied with some personal matters and that now full compliance would made if an opportunity of being heard is given. 3.0 Per contra, the Ld. DR relied upon the order of lower authorities. 4.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. The non-compliance of the assessee before the lower authorities is evident. However, before us the assessee has pleaded through an affidavit that the notices were issued by the Ld. CIT(A) through online mechanism and assessee’s lack of knowledge primarily contributed to the non-compliance. It has been deposed that the assessee shall now make full compliance before the Revenue authorities. We are conscious that no litigant benefits by non-prosecution of its case. We have noted that the Ld.AO has made the impugned addition by, inter- alia, observing para 11 of his order regarding non-submission of documentary evidences by the assessee. Be that as it may be, we are of the view that the issues have not been objectively and Page - 2 - of 4 comprehensively analyzed by the lower authorities. We are of the view that ends of justice would be met if the assessee is given one last opportunity to present its case and filed supporting evidences before the Ld.AO. The decision to remit it back to the Ld. AO is taken in view of the fact that an Assessing Officer is the fulcrum of assessment proceedings. He possess the first right and responsibilities to examine facts of a case before arriving at his decision qua determination of taxable income in a particular case. We have noted with respectful deference the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TIN box 249 ITR 216 on the subject matter. Accordingly, the matter stands remitted back to the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication de novo by passing a speaking order. To the extent the order of lower authorities on the issue stands set aside. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. AO. Any non-compliance on the part of the assesse shall be adversely viewed. The assessee is at liberty to produce all the evidences alluded before us including any other evidences deemed relevant in support of its claims before the Ld. AO during the readjudication proceedings. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are therefore allowed for statistical purposes. This order is however subject to payment of cost of Rs.2,000/-(Rupees two thousands onluy) by the assessee to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Page - 3 - of 4 8.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on , June-2025 at Chennai.