MS.BALAKRISHNAN SAILAKSHMI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-17(7), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2499/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 December 2024AY 2017-18Bench: 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 held that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given another opportunity before the CIT(A) to file all relevant evidence and documents to prosecute their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file a return of income in response to a notice issued u/s.142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the return filed was beyond the specified period. The assessee also failed to explain the source of cash deposits in their bank account before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present evidence and documents before the CIT(A) for denovo adjudication of the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

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

Hearing: 16.12.2024Pronounced: 17.12.2024

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/250/2024-25/1067067424 (1) dated 26.07.2024. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 17(7), Chennai for the assessment year 2017-18 u/s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), vide order dated 30.11.2019. 2. Before us also, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. The Ld. JCIT-DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal on the ground that the ld. Assessing Officer in the remand report has very categorical on this issue, stating that the assessee has failed to file any return in response to notice issued u/s.142(1) of the Act within the time and that the return filed on 31.07.2019 which is beyond the specified period and further on merits of the case assessee has not brought anything on record to explain before the ld. CIT(A) the source of cash deposits /credits in his bank account.

3.

We have gone through the orders of lower authorities and submission addressed by the ld. Departmental Representative. We are of the considered view that in the interest of justice assessee should be given one more opportunity before ld.CIT(A) to file all relevant evidences/documents to prosecute his case. Therefore, in the light of aforesaid factual position we deem it fit to set aside this appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication of appeal. The Ld.CIT(A) who shall proceed for denovo adjudication of appeal after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld.CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appellate proceedings as per law.

4.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 17th day of December, 2024 (मनोज कुमार अ"वाल) (मनु कुमार िग"र) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) लेखा सद" / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "ाियक सद" / JUDICIAL MEMBER चे"ई Chennai: िदनांक Dated :17-12-2024 KV आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत /Copy to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant 2. ""थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु"/CIT, Chennai 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड"फाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →