SENTHURPANDI PATHIRAKALI MUTHU,CHENNAI vs. ITO, WARD-1,, TUTICORIN

The registry has noted delay of 191 days in filing the appeal. Considering the period of delay and reasons stated at paras 1 to 12 of condonation affidavit given by the Assessee, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.

The Assessee is an individual has not filed his return of income as per section 139(1). Assessee had sold an immovable property worth Rs.30,00,000/- during FY 2016-17. The case was reopened and notice u/s 148 was issued on 26.07.2022. Pursuant to notice u/s 147 a return of income was filed on 25.08.2022. The assessee has shown the sale consideration of Rs.30,00,000/- and cost of acquisition of Rs.13,20,000/- and also claimed exemption u/s 54 of Rs.16,80,000/-. during assessment proceeding, as per chart given by AO, assessee had not responded to any notice hence, AO made an addition of Rs.29,50,000/- on account of ‘short term capital gain’ vide order dated 12.04.2023 ex-parte u/s. 144 r.w.s147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act’ in short). Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A). Assessee did not prosecute appeal before ld.CIT(A) hence, dismissed the appeal and simplicitor upheld the order of AO. Assessee is in further appeal before us.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that Ld. CIT(A) had not properly followed the principles of natural justice in true spirit. Ld.CIT(A) issued three notices however, the same was not received by the - 3 - SP 30/2024 assessee. Ld. Counsel for the appellant further prayed that if an adequate opportunity of hearing is given before ld.CIT(A), assessee will prosecute the appeal properly. Ld.CIT-DR relied upon order of ld.CIT(A) and prayed for dismissal of appeal.

We have gone through the orders of lower authorities and submissions addressed by the parties before us. We find that ld.CIT(A) has not given effective opportunity of hearing to appellant. As per his affidavit, assessee had filed letter dated 23.05.2023 wherein appellant stated that instead of e- proceedings all communications/notices may kindly be sent manually to his address. Therefore, in the light of aforesaid factual position we deem it fit to set aside this appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) to hear the appeal afresh, 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 disposal of the appeal as per law. Assessee is further directed to respond notices sent by revenue through e- proceedings or sent through all permissible modes.

Now we take up SP No.30/Chny/2024 filed by the assessee. Since we have allowed the appeal of the assesse for statistical purpose in above terms therefore, the stay petition has become infructuous. Hence, we dismiss stay petition as infructuous.

- 4 - SP 30/2024 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and stay petition of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 28th June, 2024 at Chennai.