Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay due to the legal heirs residing overseas and the father's demise. The assessee's conduct before the AO and CIT(A) was found unsatisfactory due to inadequate submission of details and evidences regarding deposits in the bank account.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay and decided to give the assessee one last opportunity to present their case. The Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and directed the Assessing Officer to re-adjudicate the matter afresh after giving an opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case due to inadequate submission of evidence.
Sections Cited
143(3), 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T VARKEY & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA
Years: 2017-18 Late Vinaitheerthan Sockalingam, Income Tax Officer By L/R K.Sigappi, Ward-1(2), Flat 4C, Kences Sarojini Apts., Trichy. 7/4, Lodikhan Street, T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. [PAN: AQDPS4124L] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr.K.Balasubramanian, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. CIT सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18.02.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 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/250/2024-25/1065672912(1) dated 14.06.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2017-18. Through the aforesaid appeal the assessee has challenged order u/s 250 dated 14.06.2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi.
Page - 1 - of 4 2.0 It has been noted that there is a delay of three months and 22 days in the case, in filing of this appeal before the tribunal. In its affidavit the assesse has submitted that she is one of the legal heirs of her father who was suffering from various ailments and ultimately demised on 07.04.2021. It was submitted that hearing notices went unnoticed as some legal heirs were residing overseas. All these activities contributed to the delay which was neither willful nor wanton. The assesse submitted that there will not be case of any non-compliance now. We have considered the justification put forth by the assesse and we are satisfied with their adequacy. We are also conscious of the fact that no litigant gains by intentionally delaying its own matters. The Ld. DR did not pose any serious objections to the delay. Accordingly, we hereby condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate this appeal.
3.0 At the outset the Ld. Counsel for the assesse informed that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has passed an ex-parte order thereby confirming the assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 10.12.2019. The assessee has argued that the Ld. AO has also passed the assessment order by drawing his presumptions unilaterally.
Page - 2 - of 4 4.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. The conduct of the assessee before the Ld.AO has been wanting. The assessee has also not fully complied with the statutory notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A). To the extent the conduct of the assessee has been found to be unsatisfactory.
4.1 We have noted that inadequate submission of details and evidences, before the lower authorities qua sources of deposits of Rs. 16,56,000/- in assessee’s bank account lies at the core of the controversy. We are therefore of the view that ends of justice would be met if the assessee is given one last opportunity to present its case and file all supporting evidences before the Ld.AO. The assessing officer is the primary authority under the income tax act to be examine facts of a case in the light of available evidences before determining correct taxable income of a tax payer. We therefore set aside the order of lower authorities on this issue and we direct the Ld. AO to readjudicate the matter de novo by examining the matter afresh in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order. Reliance in this regard is placed upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TIN box 249 ITR 216. 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 Page - 3 - of 4 the Ld. AO. Any non-compliance on the part of the assesse can be adversely viewed. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assesse on this issue are allowed for statistical purposes.
5.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 21st , February-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- ( एबी टी. वकी) (अयिताभ शुक्ला) (ABY T VARKEY) (AMITABH SHUKLA) न्यानयक सदस्य / Judicial Member लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, नदिांक/Dated: 21st , February-2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/Copy to: 1. अपीलार्थी/Assessee: 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Revenue 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Madurai 4. नवभागीय प्रनतनिनर्/DR 5. गार्ा फाईल/GF
Page - 4 - of 4