THANGARAJ NAVANEETHAKRISHNAN,MADURAI vs. ITO, NCW-2(5),, MADURAI

Thangaraj Navaneethakrishnan, Income Tax Officer, No.48, Collectorate Road, Non-Corp Ward-2(5), Anna Bus Stand, Madurai Madurai, Tamil Nadu-625 020. [PAN: AKGPN2470H] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Shri C.Karthick, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Smt.Samantha Mullamudi, Addl.CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 24.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 30.04.2025 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 / 1070388371(1) dated 15.11.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2014-15. 2.0 At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that It has not been accorded sufficient opportunity by the Ld. AO to submit its defence. It was stated that the Ld. AO gave mere 10 days of time and proceeded to complete the assessment holding non-compliance from assessee’s side. It was accordingly pleaded that the matter may kindly be considered for being remitted back to the Ld.AO.

3.0 The Ld. DR relied upon the order of lower authorities.

4.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. It has been noted that in this case notice u/s 147 was issued to the assessee engaged in the business of Hotel, to examine the transactions concerning purchase of immovable property. On page 2 of the assessment order the Ld.AO has stated that the assessee had filed its return of income on 04.12.2019 and that the Ld.AO issued notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) on 11.12.2019. It has been recorded that as there was no response, another show cause notice was issued on 17.12.2019. The Ld. AO proceeded to conclude the assessment vide his order dated 21.12.2019. The non-compliance of the assessee is evident however, it is also seen that the Ld.AO deprived the assessee with a reasonable time to file its responses. Principles of natural justice postulate that reasonable opportunity of being heard is sina qua non for any judicial proceedings. The same has been violated. Be that as it may be, we are of the view that the assessee has not been afforded adequate opportunities of being heard. We are of the view that ends of justice Page - 2 - of 4 would be met if the assessee is given one last opportunity to present its case and file supporting evidences before the Ld.AO. Accordingly, the order of lower authorities is set aside and the Ld. AO is directed to re- adjudicate the matter de novo after giving due opportunity of being heard and by passing a speaking order. 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. 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 can be adversely viewed. The assessee is at liberty to produce all or any other evidences deemed relevant in support of its claims before the Ld. AO during the re- adjudication proceedings. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are therefore allowed for statistical purposes.