S.CHANDRAMOULI,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 13(2), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) had not assigned valid reasons for rejecting the business loss claim and had failed to adjudicate the issue on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for AY 2008-09 was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of ₹10.16 lakhs, disallowing the set-off of carried forward business loss from AY 2007-08.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition without adjudicating the issue on merits and without providing valid reasons for disallowing the set-off of carried forward business loss.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(1),Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 72
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunatha
O R D E R
PER V. DURGA RAO,, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 12, Chennai, dated 20.02.2019 relevant to the assessment year 2008-09.
When the appeal was taken up for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed any adjournment petition. Hence, we proceed to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the ld. DR.
We have heard the ld. DR, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. In this case, the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2008- 09 on 29.09.2008 admitting total income of ₹.3,80,700/- and the same was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act” in short). Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act on 28.12.2010. Since the Assessing Officer believed that the income to the extent of ₹.10.16 lakhs has escaped assessment, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on the assessee besides issuing statutory notices. After considering the details furnished by the assessee, the assessment was completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 31.03.2016 by assessing the total income of the assessee at ₹.13,97,223/-. On appeal, since the assessee has not made any effort to pursue the appeal and produce relevant details in support of the grounds of appeal raised during the appellate proceedings, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition. The ld. CIT(A) was required to adjudicate the issue on merits, which was not done in this case. In this case, the claim of set off of carried forward business loss of ₹.10,16,524/- from the assessment year 2007-08 to assessment year 2008-09 under section 72 of the Act was disallowed. The ld. CIT(A) has not assigned any valid reason for rejecting the business loss claimed by the assessee, which was already determined in the assessment year 2007-08 by way of scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. Under the above facts and circumstances, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh in accordance with law by affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass speaking order.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 10th August, 2022 in Chennai.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026