YESHWANTH KUMAR,HOSUR vs. ITO, WARD-2,, HOSUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 533/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 April 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that while concurring with the DR's submission, in the interest of natural justice, an opportunity should be granted. The impugned order was set aside and restored to the CIT(A) for denovo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return declaring Rs. 7,430/- and was selected for scrutiny. The AO noted a substantial increase in agricultural income in previous years and issued notices, to which the assessee failed to respond. The AO made an addition of Rs. 97,37,913/- on best judgment basis.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) after failing to respond to notices and prosecute the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 24.04.2025Pronounced: 25.04.2025

order of the Ld. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC)

Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 17.02.2025 for Assessment Year 2020-21.

2.

Brief facts are as follows:-

The assessee is an individual filed his return of income for AY 2020-21 on 31.03.2021 declaring total income of Rs.7,430/- . The case was selected for complete scrutiny through CASS. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noted that in the previous years the assessee has declared large increase in agricultural income. Therefore, the AO issued several notices / show-cause notices to the assessee in order to verify substantial increase in agricultural income of the assessee. But, the assessee failed to respond to the same. Hence, the AO completed the assessment and made addition of Rs.97,37,913/- on best judgement basis on account of agricultural income.

3.

Assessee further challenged the order of assessment passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act before the ld.CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal of the assessee and confirmed the order of the AO.

Aggrieved, assessee is in further appeal before us.

4.

Before us, the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has sent notices to the assessee through e-mail. He further submitted that assessee being not well versed in computer literate, the assessee could not prosecute the appeal before the ld. CIT(A).

Therefore, he prayed that the assessee may be provided an adequate and proper representation time to file evidence and documents, if any, to substantiate his case before the CIT(A). The ld.DR stated that the assessee is habitual defaulter in appearing before the appellate authority hence no lenient view is to be taken in the case and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

5.

Though, we concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice and grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We also find that assessee has not represented before the ld.CIT(A) despite notices for the reasons stated above. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee, subject to cost of Rs.10,000/- which shall be deposited by the assessee within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order to ‘Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority’ at Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The proof of the cost deposit will be furnished by the Assessee before CIT(A). The assessee is directed to substantiate its case with all evidence and documents, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which AO shall be at liberty to proceed with proceedings on merits as per law. The ld. counsel, who appeared also assured the bench that he will ensure that the assessee will prosecute the case diligently.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →