R. HEMA ,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORP WARD 4(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 539/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 May 2024AY 2017-18Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, considering the principle of natural justice. The appeal was restored back to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, giving the assessee an opportunity to substantiate its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 was filed with a significant delay. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 5.54 Lacs on account of cash deposits, which was confirmed by the CIT(A) as the assessee failed to make any representation.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) despite a significant delay and failure to appear.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI

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

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय �ी मनोज कुमार अ�वाल ,लेखा सद# एवं माननीय �ी मनु कुमार िग&र, �ाियक सद# के सम'। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा(रण वष( / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Ms. R. Hema ITO बनाम No.2-c, 2/15, Sri Krishna Apartments, Corporate Ward 4(2), Lalithapuram Street, Royapettah, Chennai. / Vs. Chennai – 600 014. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ABWPH-7094-N (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl. CIT) - Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 30-04-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 07-05-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 15-03- 2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 20-11-2019. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit for Rs.5.54 Lacs. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same since the assessee failed to make any representation therein. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

2.

The registry has noted a delay of 291 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by the assessee on the strength of an affidavit. It has been submitted that the assessee was not aware of computers and hearing notices were sent through portal which were not received. Considering the period of delay, we condone the delay. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. The Ld. Sr. DR has pleaded for dismissal of the appeal. 3. 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 appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its case failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to consider the appeal on merits on the basis of material on record. 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 7th May, 2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →