GOVINDASWAMY CHITRA SIVARAJ,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, CORP CIRCLE 1, COIMBATORE
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI JAGADISH
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 09.02.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on 28.03.2022. :- 2 -:
There is a delay of 34 days in filing the appeal by the assessee.
The assessee has given the reason for delay in filing the appeal. We
have considered the petition of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied
that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is condoned accordingly.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has received
payment in respect of transfer of immovable property of Rs.7,65,62,500/- and made cash deposit in saving bank account of Rs.
2,41,84,000/- and purchased bullion and jewellery of Rs. 9,45,255/-
and mutual funds of Rs. 5,00,000/-, but the assessee has not filed his
return of income. The A.O reopened the assessment and made
addition of Rs. 12,01,49,729/- on account of unexplained income.
Aggrieved against the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred
appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has issued notice on 07.09.2023, 19.10.2023 and 24.01.2024, but the assessee has not responded to the notices and therefore, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessees’ appeal ex-parte and confirmed the addition made by A.O.
Before us, the Ld. A.R has submitted that he could not reply to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A) as he has not received any :- 3 -:
communication and requested that one more opportunity of hearing
may be given to the assessee to present his case as the orders
passed by the lower authorities are ex-parte.
On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival contentions, and perused the materials
available on record. In this case, the assessment order has been passed ex-parte making addition of Rs. 12,01,49,729/-. The Ld.
CIT(A) has also passed order ex-parte as the assessee non complied
with the notices. The assessee has been non-complied before the A.O as well as ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR, before us has given reason
that he has not received any notices or communication. We find that the orders of the lower authorities are ex-parte. Therefore, we are of the opinion that keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, the assessee be provided with another opportunity of being heard. We
accordingly remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate this appeal afresh in accordance with law subject to the condition of payment of Rs.5,000/- towards cost in favour of the State
Legal Aid Authority at Hon’ble Madras High Court within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. We also direct the Assessee to appear :- 4 -:
before the Ld. CIT(A) on the date of hearing without fail. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 31st July, 2024. (मनु कुमार िग"र) (जगदीश) (Manu Kumar Giri) (Jagadish) "ाियक सद! / Vice President लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य /Accountant Member सद"य चे"ई/Chennai, "दनांक/Dated: 31st July, 2024. EDN/-
आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant
""थ"/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु"/CIT, Coimbatore 4. िवभागीय "ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड" फाईल/GF
