SHRI B. RAVISHANKAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW -10 (5), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1743/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 March 2021AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering principles of natural justice and the need to decide on merits, set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The issue was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision after considering the details to be filed by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for not filing books of accounts and expenses related to customs and C&F charges. The assessee, claiming to be uneducated, requested another opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present evidence regarding expenses when books of accounts were not filed before the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA

Hearing: 25.02.2021Pronounced: 02.03.2021

PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Chennai in 12/2017-18; dated 31.01.2019 relevant to the Assessment Year 2015 - 2016.

2 -: 2. There is a delay of 48 days in filing the appeal and the Assessee has filed an affidavit. We have gone through the affidavit and as there is sufficient cause to condone the delay, accordingly, the delay is condoned.

3.

When this appeal was taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the Assessee has submitted that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal on the ground that the Assessee has not filed the books of accounts and the corresponding expenses incurred towards the customs and C&F charges and submitted that the Assessee being an uneducated person, hence may be given one more opportunity to substantiate his case before the Assessing Officer.

4.

The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the order of the authorities below:

5.

We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below.

6.

In the Assessment Order, the Assessing Officer has noted that the details in respect of the import of goods are not recorded in the books of accounts and corresponding expenditure towards customs and C&F charges were also not explained. Therefore, the Assessing Officer had made the addition u/s.69 of the Income Tax Act. 1961. Even before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) also no details were filed. However, the learned Counsel for the Assessee gave

3 -: an undertaking before the Bench that he is ready to furnish all the details before the Assessing Officer and that one more opportunity be given to the Assessee to substantiate his case before the Assessing Officer.

7.

We, thus keeping in view the principles of natural justice and also to decide the issue according to the merits of the case, we set aside the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and remit the issue back to the Assessing Officer to decide the issue de novo and in accordance with law and after considering the details as may be filed by the Assessee.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced on 2nd March, 2021 in Chennai.

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →