Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was directed against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2014-15. The assessee argued that the reopening of assessment under Section 147 was unsustainable as there was no failure to disclose material facts and no fresh material had arisen. The assessee also contended that issues like house rent allowance and lorry hire charges were already examined during scrutiny, making the reopening a change of opinion. Additionally, the assessee claimed a lack of reasonable opportunity before the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not adjudicated the legal issue of reopening the assessment raised by the assessee, nor was there any mention of a hearing notice or call for details on merits. Therefore, the Tribunal deemed it fit to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, with an opportunity for the assessee to file evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147 was legally valid and whether a proper opportunity of being heard was provided to the assessee.
Sections Cited
147, 37
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunatha
Year: 2014-15 Vairavan Muthuraman, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of New No. 45, First Main Road, Shenoy Income Tax, Nagar (West), Chennai. Circle, 1, Karaikudi. [PAN:ABAPM0217G] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Smt. Samantha Mullamudi, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 12.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 18.12.2024 आदेश /O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.07.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2014-15.
At the outset, the ld. AR Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate submits that ld. CIT(A) did not give any finding on the legal issue of reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] raised by the assessee. He vehemently argued that there was neither any failure on the part of assessee to disclose material facts nor any fresh material had arisen leading to any income escaping assessment, thereby, the reopening of assessment is unsustainable and untenable in law. Further he submits that the issues of house rent allowance claimed under section 37 of the Act, lorry hire charges and TDS on lorry hire charges were examined in the scrutiny proceedings and hence reconsidering the same tantamount to change of opinion. It was further submitted that no reasonable opportunity was afforded by the ld. CIT(A) and prayed that the assessee may be granted one more opportunity to prosecute assessee’s case before the ld. CIT(A).
The ld. DR Smt. Samantha Mullamudi, Addl. CIT fairly conceded that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Heard both the parties and perused the material on record. On perusal of the impugned order, we note that before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has raised ground No. 1 to 5 in objecting to reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Act alleging ‘change of opinion’, but, however, the ld. CIT(A) did not adjudicate the legal issue raised by the assessee. Further we note that there is no mention about any notice of hearing has been issued on the assessee or calling for any details on merits. Under the above facts and circumstances, we deem it fit to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication by affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence in support of his claim. Thus, grounds Nos. 1 to 14 raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 18th December, 2024 at Chennai.