Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 24 days. The assessee initially filed a return of income, then a revised return after a survey. The Assessing Officer made a significant addition, and the CIT(A) confirmed this order ex-parte due to the assessee's lack of response.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay subject to payment of cost. Considering the need for the assessee's assistance and in the interest of justice, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition ex-parte without granting a further opportunity to the assessee, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi&
Lakshmana Acharya Rajendra Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Pandian, 71, Kasukadai Bazar, Income Tax, Virudhunagar District, Aruppukottai, Corporate Circle-1, Tamil Nadu 626 101. Madurai. [PAN: ABOPR8335C] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 13.11.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 20.11.2024 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 30.07.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2012-13.
We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 24 days. Upon hearing both the parties along with reasons raised in the affidavit and & S.A. No. 63/Chny/24 with the observations of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in assessee’s own case, we condone the delay of 24 days subject to the condition of payment of ₹.10,000/- towards cost in favour of the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Coming to the merits of the case, we note that the assessee filed original return of income declaring total income of ₹.2,03,06,770/-. A survey was conducted on the assessee on 01.11.2011 and the assessee filed revised return of income declaring total income of ₹.2,08,93,510/-. Under scrutiny, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment and determined total income of the assessee at ₹.6,44,37,835/- vide his order dated 31.03.2015 passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. As aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). On perusal of the impugned order at para 5.8, we note that the ld. CIT(A) issued 5 notices and there was no response from the assessee in substantiating the grounds raised
in Form
35. Having no option, the ld. CIT(A) proceeded to confirm the order of the Assessing Officer exparte of the assessee.
& S.A. No. 63/Chny/24 4. Before us, the ld. AR Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate pleads that one more opportunity may be afforded to the assessee and the assessee is ready with all material evidence to prosecute his case without fail.
The ld. DR did not object to the same.
Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the addition involved therein, in our opinion, it requires assistance from the assessee and therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The ld. CIT(A) shall satisfy on production of receipt of payment of cost imposed hereinabove and proceed to decide the issue on merits and pass order in accordance with law. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The Stay Application filed by the assessee in S.A. No. 63/Chny/2024, was also heard along with the main appeal. Since we have adjudicated the main appeal by setting aside the CIT(A)’s order and remitted the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. Thus, the stay petition filed by the assessee become infructuous and accordingly, the same stands dismissed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application is dismissed. Order pronounced on 20th November, 2024 at Chennai.