REKHA MUSADDY,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-1(6), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2703/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 December 2024AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K (Vice President), SHRI JAGADISH (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without discussing the case on merits and without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee. In the interest of justice and in view of the principles of natural justice, the assessee should be given another opportunity to substantiate their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in the business of trading earth moving equipment, filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal ex-parte without discussing the case on merits. The Assessing Officer (AO) had completed the assessment based on various additions including net value of property, unsecured loans, and disallowance of interest.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without discussing the merits and providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 143(3A),Section 143(3B),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI JAGADISH

Hearing: 17.12.2024Pronounced: 20.12.2024

आदेश / O R D E R

PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 02.09.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”).

2.

The assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of trading of earth moving equipments and spares and iron and steel in the name of Ayush Earthmovers. The A.O has completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act estimating the annual net value of property assessed at Rs. 34,80,000/-, addition on unsecured loans u/s. 68 of the Act of Rs. 15,00,000/-, unexplained credits of Rs. 2,50,000/- and interest on unsecured loans of Rs. 4,28,725/-, and interest disallowance of Rs. 39,04,542/-. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal ex- parte without discussing the case on merits.

3.

The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee before us has submitted the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without discussing the case on merits and without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee and requested to provide one more opportunity to substantiate his case.

4.

The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, has relied on the orders of lower authorities.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. The Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without discussing the case on merits. The Ld. CIT(A) has stated that the assessee is not in a position to submit documents in support of his case. The Ld. AR before us has submitted that all the material available to substantiate their claim and therefore, one more opportunity should be provided to substantiate her case in the interest of justice. We are of the opinion that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the assessee be provided with another opportunity of hearing to substantiate his case before the A.O. Accordingly, we set aside the orders passed by the lower authorities and restore the matter back to the file of the A.O for denovo adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to appear before the A.O on the date of hearing without fail. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced on 20th December, 2024.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →