ARUMUGAM KUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON CORP CIRCLE-5, CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, to meet the ends of justice, directed the CIT(A) to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to be heard and adjudicate the issues afresh. However, if the assessee fails to avail this opportunity, the previous ex-parte order will stand confirmed.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a return of income, but the Assessing Officer made significant additions. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), but failed to appear or file submissions despite opportunities, leading to an ex-parte order confirming the assessment.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order without granting sufficient opportunity to the assessee, and whether the assessee deserves another opportunity to present their case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy
O R D E R
PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 5, Chennai, dated 30.11.2018 relevant to the assessment year 2013-14. Besides challenging the issue on merits, the assessee has mainly challenged the ex-parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A).
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and filed her return of income for the assessment year 2013-14 on 31.10.2013 admitting income of ₹. 26,56,630/-. The Assessing Officer completed scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by determining the assessed income of the assessee at ₹.3,29,08,680/- after making addition towards income from other sources.
The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Despite sufficient opportunities given, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed adjournment letter/written submission. Thus, after considering the facts of the case, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.
On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee to present his case before the first appellate authority for deciding the issues under appeal.
On the other hand, the ld. DR has submitted that sufficient opportunities were given to the assessee and thereafter the ld. CIT(A) decided the issue on merits and objected for offering any more opportunity to the assessee.
We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. In this case, against various additions made in the assessment order, the assessee preferred further appeal before the first appellate authority. Since there was no response from assessee against posting the appeal for hearing on 27.09.2018, 10.10.2018, 25.10.2018 and 20.11.2018, the ld. CIT(A) proceeded to conclude the issues on merits and confirmed the assessment order. Since the ld. Counsel for the assessee has prayed for one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee, to meet the ends of justice, we direct the ld. CIT(A) to give one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee and adjudicate the issues afresh in accordance with law. In case, the assessee failed to avail the opportunity as may be given by the ld. CIT(A), the appellate order already passed by the ld. CIT(A) stands confirmed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 24th September, 2019 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
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026