SHRI. V KRISHNAKUMAR,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER COMPANY WARD II (1), CHENNAI

The assessee filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Chennai in dated 12.12.2017 for the assessment year 2005-06.

Shri V. Krishnakumar, the assessee, admitted income from salary, long term capital gain and income from other sources in his return filed for the assessment year 2005-06. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee acquired a property in the year 1997. After incurring developmental expenses, etc., the assessee sold it on 30.06.2004. Therefore, the Assessing Officer assessed the income from this property under the head “business”. He also found that the assessee entered into an agreement dated 19.04.1996 (sic), however registered it on 30.06.2004 in the name of assessee and two others. From the agreement copy, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee made an advance on 19.04.1998 (sic), hence he adopted the indexed cost of acquisition related to financial year 1998-99 (sic) and completed the assessment. Aggrieved against that order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved against that order, the assessee filed this appeal.

The Ld.AR pleaded that the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without giving adequate opportunity to the assessee and hence pleaded that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A), so that the issues are decided on merits.

Per contra, the Ld.DR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) posted the case for hearing on 11.04.2015. However, the assessee sought an adjournment and hence the Ld.CIT(A) posted the case on 05.12.2017. But on 04.12.207, one Shri R. Saravanan, an employee of the auditor’s office appeared before the Ld.CIT(A) and filed a letter requesting an adjournment. Since, he orally informed the Ld.CIT(A) that there are no documents available with the assessee, as they were lost in the floods of 2015, the Ld.CIT(A) awaited till 11.12.2017 for the assessee to furnish the details in support of his claim. Since there was no further correspondence or communication from the assessee or the auditor, the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal. Therefore, he supported the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) & the Assessing Officer.

We heard the rival submissions and gone through the relevant material. Since the assessee has failed to pursue the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. Since the assessee pleads one more opportunity before the Ld.CIT(A) for deciding the issues on merit, we deem it fit to remit the issue back to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for a fresh examination subject to a cost of Rs.5,000/- on the assessee, who shall pay the same to the Prime Minister National Relief Fund (PMNRF). Subject to the assessee depositing Rs.5,000/-, to the PMNRF and producing the copy of the receipt thereof before the Ld.CIT(A), the Ld.CIT(A) would post the case for hearing. The assessee shall place relevant material before the Ld.CIT(A) and actively pursue his appeal as required by the Ld.CIT(A) in accordance with law. The Ld.CIT(A), on due examination of them and after affording due opportunity to the assessee, shall decide the issue in accordance with law.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.