What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT, while noting the assessee's negligence, granted another opportunity for hearing based on the principle of natural justice. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT is against the CIT(A)'s order confirming an addition of Rs. 36.39 Lacs representing cash deposits during demonetization. The assessee had not appeared before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) despite prior non-appearance, and whether the addition made by the AO should be re-examined.

Nivetha vs ITO | s.143(3) | ITAT Chennai 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arise out of order passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] on 31-01-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 17-12-2019. The registry has noted delay of 2 days in the appeal, which stands condoned.

In the assessment order, Ld. AO has made addition of Rs.36.39 Lacs which represent cash deposits during demonetization period. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same since the assessee did not appear therein. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR has prayed for another opportunity of hearing which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

Though the assessee has remained negligent, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with disposal of appeal on merits on the basis of material on record.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 3rd July, 2024 (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा45 / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद7 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे9ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated :03-07-2024 DS आदेशकीJितिलिपअ%ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant 2. " थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुA/CIT Chennai 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडFफाईल/GF

NIVETHA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Latest GST High Court judgments