SURENDHIRAN UNNITHAN VINODKUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-10(6), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2618/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 December 2024AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member), SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial 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 acknowledged that the assessee had not been given sufficient time by the AO to file evidence and also had not represented themselves before the CIT(A) despite notices. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the appeal to the AO for a fresh assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual involved in film production and distribution, filed an income return for Assessment Year 2020-21. The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions to the total income under various sections, including Section 68, for unexplained loans, creditors, and advances, as well as for incorrect expenses. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the AO's order ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was provided adequate opportunity to present evidence and whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ (SMC

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI

Hearing: 17.12.2024Pronounced: 19.12.2024

(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2020-2021) Surendhiran Unnithan Vinodkumar Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Plot No.54, Door No.5/12, Non Corporate Ward 10(6) 2nd Street, Natesan Nagar, Chennai. Ramapuram, Chennai 600 089. [PAN: AECPV 4836P] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri K. Balasubramanian, Advocate ��यथ� क� ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. D. Komali Krishna, IRS, CIT. सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 17.12.2024 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 19.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member) This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067628888 (1) dated 14.08.2024. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 10(6), Chennai for the assessment year 2020-21 u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), vide order dated 20.09.2022.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual deriving income from business as Film Producer and Distributor. For the assessment year 2020-21, he has filed the return of income on 26-03-2021admitting a total income of Rs. 13,15,240/-, The return was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act on 28/09/2021 at returned income. Thereafter, the return was selected for limited scrutiny and notice u/s.143 (2) of the Act issued on 29/06/2021. Assessment was completed by passing an order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 1448 of the I.T. Acton 20/9/2022. While so doing the learned AO has determined the total income at Rs. 46,86,000/- by making the following additions: ‘’i) Addition of Rs.3,62,500/- u/s 68 of the Act for Unexplained Unsecured Loan. II) Addition of Rs.3,08,506/-u/s.68 of the Act for Unexplained creditor. iii) Addition of Rs. 18,00,000/-u/s.68 of the Act for Unexplained Advance Received. iv) Addition of Rs. 8,99,752/-for Expenses treated as incorrect’. Assessee further challenged the order of assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act before the ld.CIT(A) who proceeded ex-parte and confirmed the order of the AO on merits. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us.

3.

Before the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the AO has not given sufficient time to file evidence and documents to substantiate his explanation. The ld.DR stated that the assessee is habitual defaulter in appearing before the appellate authority hence no lenient view is to be taken in this case and prayed for dismissal of appeal.

4.

Though we concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice and grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We also find that assessee has not represented before the ld.CIT(A) despite notices. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. AO for denovo assessment on merits after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case with all evidence, confirmations and documents, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld. AO shall be at liberty to proceed with the assessment proceedings on merits as per law.

5.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 19th day of December, 2024

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →