YASODA BAI,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 12(5), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1168/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 July 2019AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating the issues on merits. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits after giving the assessee another opportunity to present her case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's return was processed, and the case was selected for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer made a significant addition to the assessee's income, leading to an appeal before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits of the case, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present her case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 143(3),Section 2(14)(iii),Section 10(37)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

Hearing: 04.07.2019Pronounced: 19.07.2019

O R D E R

PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Chennai dated 28.02.2019 relevant to the assessment year 2014-15. Besides raising various grounds in the grounds of appeal, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has mainly challenged the ex-parte order without adjudicating the issues on merits.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on 18.11.2014 admitting total income of ₹.

8,51,560/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny. Against service of statutory notices, the assessee filed the details called for. After verification of details filed by the assessee and considering the submissions, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act and determined the income of the assessee at ₹. 1,37,53,735/- after making addition of ₹.1,29,02,172/- being income from capital gains.

3.

The assessee carried the matter in appeal before ld. CIT(A). Despite various opportunities given, it appears that the assessee has neither put appearance nor filed any written submission in presenting her case. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. Against the disallowance of exemption claimed under section 2(14)(iii) /10(37) of the Act, the assessee has preferred further appeal before the appellate authority. Despite various opportunities given, it appears that the assessee has neither put appearance nor filed any written submission in presenting her case. We also find that the ld. CIT(A) has simply confirmed the assessment order without giving any findings on merits. Under these circumstances, we direct the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue on merits in accordance with law by giving one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee to present her case.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 19th July, 2019 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 2(14)(iii)

All 238 judgments and leading authorities on Section 2(14)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →