Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN
आदेश / O R D E R
PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Tiruchirapalli in 15/CIT(A)/TRY dated 26.03.2015 for the Assessment Year 2011-12.
2 -: 2. Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate represented on behalf of the Assessee and Ms. R. Anita, JCIT represented on behalf of the Revenue.
At the time of hearing the learned Authorized Representative submitted that he did not wish to press Ground No.3 of the assessee’ appeal in respect of the expenses incurred on maintenance of the tractors. The learned Authorized Representative has endorsed to that effect as early as on 13.11.2017 and today on 02.12.2019. Consequently, Ground No.3 of the assessee’s appeal stands dismissed as not pressed.
In respect of Ground No.2, it was submitted by the learned Authorized Representative that the issue was against the action of the learned CIT(A) in enhancing the addition made by the Assessing Officer in respect of the disallowance of agricultural income without giving any notice of enhancement.
It was further a submission that in Ground No.4, the assessee had challenged the action of the learned CIT(A) in enhancing the quantum of disallowance of expenses in respect of the JCB without issuing any notice to the assessee.
The learned Departmental Representative was requested to show whether any enhancement notice has been issued on the assessee by the learned CIT(A). The learned Departmental Representative placed before us the order sheet entry, wherein it is mentioned that the issue of enhancement has been intimated to the Authorized Representative of the assessee. This endorsement is below the signature of the learned Authorized Representative of the assessee. Further, it is noticed that no notice on enhancement has 3 -: been issued to the assessee specifically. What is in the mind of the learned CIT(A) when he proposed the enhancement is not coming out of the endorsement in the order sheet and in any case principles of natural justice having been violated in so far as no notice of enhancement has been issued to the assessee in line with the provisions of Section 251(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Consequently, the same is unsustainable and consequently the enhancement as done by the learned CIT(A) stands deleted. The Assessee has not raised any ground in respect of the additions made by the Assessing Officer and as sustained by the learned CIT(A) on account of the enhancement. Consequently, as it is only the enhancement made by the learned CIT(A) that has been challenged by the assessee and it is only the enhancement which stands deleted.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 2nd December, 2019 in Chennai.