Loading judgment…
Facts
A search was conducted on 15.02.2018 in the case of M/s. Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Charitable and Educational Trust, which revealed that employees received unaccounted cash salary. The assessee did not file returns for Assessment Years 2012-13 to 2017-18, leading the AO to make additions.
Held
The Tribunal held that although the assessee was a habitual defaulter, in the interest of natural justice, an opportunity for a fresh hearing should be granted. The impugned orders were set aside and appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh hearings.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity for appeal hearing despite previous non-compliance and ex-parte orders?
Sections Cited
132, 153C, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI
The captioned seven appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai-19 [CIT(A)] of even dated 05.12.2024 for Assessment Years 2012-13 to 2018-19. Since the facts and issues are common in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed off by this common order.
Brief facts are as under: A search u/s 132 of the Act, was conducted. on 15.02.2018 in the case of M/s. Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Charitable and Educational Trust. The search covered the offices of various group entities, residences of key individuals, and specifically the residence of the appellant Shri J. Senthil Kumar, General Manager of M/s Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan Group, located at Door No. 280, Sowbakya Nagar, North Madhavi Road, Perambalur-621212. During the course of search, several incriminating materials were found that revealed the fact that the employees of the Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan were in receipt of unaccounted cash salary. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee did not comply with the statutory notice(s) issued for the AY(s) 2012-13 to 2017-18 by filing any return of income. Hence, AO made additions for AYs 2012-13 to 2018-19.
Assessee further challenged all the orders of assessment passed u/s.153C r.w.s. 144 of the Act before the ld.CIT(A), who proceeded ex-parte and confirmed the orders of the AO on merits.
Aggrieved, assessee is in appeals before us.
Before us, the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has sent the notices however, these cases were adjourned whenever it was posted. Therefore, assessee did not find occasion to file the written submissions/responses. Therefore, ld. counsel prayed that the assessee may be provided an adequate and proper representation to file evidence and documents, if any, to substantiate its case. 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 these cases and prayed for dismissal of these appeals.
Though we concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We also find that assessee has not properly represented before the ld.CIT(A) despite notices for the reasons stated above. We also note that even before AO the orders are ex-parte. Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh appeal hearings after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee subject to cost of Rs.1,000/- each appeal which shall be deposited by the assessee within 30 days from the date of receipt of these orders to ‘Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority’ at Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The proof of the cost deposits in both cases will be furnished by the Assessee before Ld.CIT(A) whose shall proceed for de novo appeal hearings, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case with all evidence and documents, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld.CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appeal proceedings as per law. The ld. counsel, who appeared also assured the bench that he will ensure that the assessee will prosecute these appeal cases diligently.
In the result, all these seven appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.