What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that providing one more opportunity to the assessee would not prejudice the Revenue and would promote the cause of justice. Therefore, the orders of the lower authorities were set aside.

The assessee's appeal was disposed of by the CIT(Appeals) without providing an opportunity to furnish proof for the claims made in the return. The assessee, a housewife, claimed to have prepared written submissions that could not be filed due to the appeal's premature disposal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in disposing of the appeal without granting sufficient opportunity to the assessee to produce necessary material and evidence.

Rammohan Pratima vs DCIT | ITAT Chennai 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT

Hearing: 08.02.2018Pronounced: 28.02.2018

आदेश /O R D E R

PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -5, Chennai, dated 10.08.2017 and pertains to assessment year 2013-14.

Shri G. Seetharaman, the Ld. representative for the assessee, submitted that the CIT(Appeals), without giving opportunity to the assessee, disposed the appeal even though the assessee requested time for furnishing proof of the claim made in the return. According to the Ld. representative, the assessee also prepared written submission on 10.08.2017, however, the same could not be submitted since the appeal was disposed of in the meantime. According to the Ld. representative, the assessee being a housewife, has to depend her representative for submitting the papers. Therefore, according to the Ld. representative, an opportunity may be given to the assessee to produce necessary material.

We heard Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative also. The assessee claims that sufficient opportunity was not given for producing necessary material before the CIT(Appeals).

However, the CIT(Appeals) observed in the impugned order that even after posting the appeal for four times, the assessee or her representative neither appeared nor produced any material. The fact remains that the appeal was disposed in the absence of the assessee. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the object of income-tax proceeding is to ascertain the taxable income and levy tax thereon. The proceeding before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(Appeals) is a judicial proceeding under Section 136 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Therefore, giving one more opportunity to the assessee would not prejudice the interests of Revenue in any way. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that giving one more opportunity to the assessee would definitely promote the cause of justice. Accordingly, the orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the entire issue raised by the assessee is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall re-examine the matter in the light of the material available on record and also the material that may be filed by the assessee and thereafter decide the issue afresh, in accordance with law, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

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

RAMMOHAN PRATIMA,CHENNAI vs. DCIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 5, CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments