P.NEELARAJ,PERAMBALUR vs. THE ACIT,CC-1, TRICHY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 411/CHNY/2021Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 August 2022AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT, while noting the assessee's negligence, granted another opportunity of hearing before the first appellate authority based on the principle of natural justice. This was subject to a cost of Rs. 25,000/- to be paid to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the first appellate authority despite multiple opportunities. The appeals were dismissed by the CIT(A) on merits. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the first appellate authority, despite prior non-appearance, and under what conditions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 153C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA Nos.410/Chny/2021
ITA Nos.411/Chny/2021

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeals by assessee for Assessment Years (AYs) 2014-15 & 2016-17 arises out of the separate orders of Learned First Appellate Authority both dated 16-09-2021. 2. The Ld. AR, at the outset, submitted that the assessee could not attend the appellate proceedings and therefore, the assessee be provided with another opportunity of hearing before first appellate ITA Nos.410 & 411/Chny/2021 - 2 - authority. The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand, pleaded for dismissal of the appeals by drawing attention to observations in para-4 of the impugned orders. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee failed to appear before first appellate authority despite being provided with various opportunities of hearing. Having heard the rival submissions and after due consideration of relevant material on record, the appeals are disposed-off as under.

4.

The facts in AY 2014-15 are that the assessee was assessed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act on 20-12-2019. The assessee was saddled with addition of Rs.750 Lacs being undisclosed portion of sale consideration. Though the assessee preferred further appeal, however, he failed to appear before Ld. CIT(A) despite being provided with various opportunity of hearing as noted by Ld. CIT(A) in Para-4 of the impugned order. Consequently, Ld. CIT(A), after going through the merits of the case, dismissed the appeal for both the years vide separate orders both dated 16-09-2021. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

5.

After going through the impugned orders, we concur with the plea of Ld. DR that the assessee remained negligent in attending the appellate proceedings. However, keeping in view of the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate his case before first appellate authority. This concession would come at a cost of Rs.25,000/- which shall be paid by the assessee to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order. The receipt / proof shall be furnished by the assessee to the Ld. first appellate authority, who shall proceed with & 411/Chny/2021 - 3 - denovo adjudication of the appeals for both the years after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, in turn, is directed to substantiate its case.

6.

Both the appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 01st August, 2022.

More judgments on Section 153C

All 9,619 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →