UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LIMITED,ROYAPETTAH, CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPRATE CRICLE 3(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2398/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 December 2024AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, to meet the ends of natural justice, decided to provide the assessee with one more opportunity to present their case. The matter was set aside and remitted back to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file written submissions or documentary evidence before the CIT(A) despite being given opportunities, leading to the confirmation of the AO's order. The assessee argued for a chance to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present evidence before the CIT(A) when they failed to do so earlier.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 201,Section 201A,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T VARKEYAND

United India Insurance Company Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Limited, Corporate Circle-3(1), The Deputy Manager, Chennai. CFAC Department, Head Office, United India Insurance Company Limited, Floor No.9, 24, Whites Road, Peters Colony, Royapettah, Chennai-600 014 [PAN: AAACU5552C] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Ms.Pavitra Mani, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Ms.Sheila Parthasarthy, Addl.CIT सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 04.12.2024 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/APL/S/250/2024-25/1066747754(1) dated 16.07.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), for the assessment year 2013-14. Through the aforesaid appeal the assesse has challenged order u/s 250 dated 16.07.2024 passed by Addl/JCIT(A)- 2 Pune.

2.0 At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee informed that it had contested the orders u/s 201 / 201A dated 18.03.2020 passed by the Ld. AO imposing demand of Rs.31,229/- before the Ld. CIT(A) but could not file any written submission / documentary evidence before the Ld. First Appellate Authority as a result of which the order u/s 201 / 201A was confirmed. The Ld. Sr. AR argued that the assessee was given sufficient opportunity by the Ld. First Appellate Authority and hence no relief is permissible. 3.0 We have heard the ld. DR, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. In this case, admittedly the assessee could not file any evidence or explanation with regard to Impugned controversy qua the TDS deduction before the Ld. CIT(A) even though opportunities were given. 4.0 Be that as it may be, in order to meet the ends of natural justice, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee shall be afforded one more opportunity of being heard to furnish the details. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to him to re adjudicate the matter de novo after giving one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish complete details with evidence before the Ld. First Appellate Authority without fail.

More judgments on Section 201

All 1,566 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →