N.A.SHAHUL HAMEED,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD-12(4), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2523/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 March 2022AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

While acknowledging the assessee's negligence, the Tribunal granted another opportunity for hearing based on the principle of natural justice. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to attend assessment and appellate proceedings, leading to a best judgment assessment and confirmation of the same. The assessee appealed this order.

What were the issues?

Violation of principles of natural justice due to non-attendance in proceedings and the need for a fresh opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, CHENNAI

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

For Appellant: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. DR
For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. DR

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Chennai [CIT(A)] dated 28-05-2019 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 r/w s. 147 of the Act on 25-12-2018.

1.

2 - 2. One of the grounds raised by the assessee is violation of principles of natural justice since the assessee has not attended the assessment proceedings as well as appellate proceedings. The Ld. AR pleaded for another opportunity of hearing which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

3. The material facts are that the assessee being resident individual was assessed on best judgment basis u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 25.12.2018. The income of the assessee has been determined as Rs.106.60 Lacs since the assessee sold an immoveable property during the year and earned capital gains. During appellate proceedings, the assessee did not file any response despite being provided with various opportunities as noted in Para 4 of the impugned order.. Accordingly, in the absence of any new material forthcoming from the assessee, the assessment was confirmed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

4. Having considered factual matrix, though we concur with the stand of revenue that the assessee has remained negligent in attending the proceedings before lower authorities, however, keeping in view the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its case failing which ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to dispose-off the appeal on the basis of material on record.

5.

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 24th March, 2022.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →