Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2018-19. The assessee contended that they were not given adequate opportunity to be heard and that details filed were not considered by the lower authorities.
Held
The Tribunal noted that inadequate submission of details and evidence at the lower levels was the core issue. Considering the ends of justice, the assessee was granted one last opportunity to present their case and file supporting evidence before the AO.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was denied adequate opportunity to present their case and whether the lower authorities considered all the evidences filed.
Sections Cited
144, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T VARKEY & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA
Years: 2018-19 M/s.Krishnaveni The Income Tax Officer, No.18B, South Street, Non-Corpn Ward-2(3) Singarayar Colony, Madurai Bibikulam, Madurai-625002. [PAN: CLFPK4336P] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Ms.L.Sweety, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri K.N.Dhandapani, CIT सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 27.11.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 23.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :
This appeal is filed against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067018403(1) dated 25.07.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2018- 19. Through the aforesaid appeal the assesse has challenged order u/s 250 dated 25.07.2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi.
2.0 At the outset the Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that it has not been given adequate opportunity of being heard in as much as the details filed by it before the Ld. AO and the Ld. CIT(A) have not been considered before making the impugned addition and determining its taxable income at Rs. 3,78,83,600/-. A request was accordingly made to set aside the case back to the Ld.AO for readjudication.
3.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. It is the case of the assessee that it had filed details and submissions along with evidences before the Ld.AO which have been ignored while invoking provisions of 144 of the act. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further informed that through its Form-35 it had filed documentary evidences which got omitted to be considered by the Ld.First Appellate Authority. Reliance was placed upon Column No.12 and 12.1 of the Form-35 filed by acknowledgement No.149574270210324. Copy thereof has been placed on records. It was argued that if the impugned documents were considered there would not have been a case of impugned addition to assessee’s income. The Ld. DR placed reliance upon the order of lower authorities.
4.0 We have noted that inadequate submission of details and evidences, before the lower authorities, qua issues on which additions were made by the Ld. AO, lies at the core of the controversy. Before us the Ld.Counsel for the assessee filed a paper book justifying its arguments. The assessing officer is the primary authority under the income tax act to be examine facts of a case in the light of available evidences before determining correct taxable income of a tax payer. We are therefore of the view that ends of justice would be met if the assessee is given one last opportunity to present its case and file all supporting evidences before the Ld.AO. We therefore set aside the order of lower authorities on this issue and we direct the Ld. AO to readjudicate the matter de novo by examining the matter afresh in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order. Reliance in this regard is placed upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TIN box 249 ITR 216. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. AO. Any non-compliance on the part of the assesse can be adversely viewed. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assesse on this issue are allowed for statistical purposes.