ANNADURAI KATHIRESAN,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, WARD-1, NAMAKKAL
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. This was done to grant the assessee another opportunity of hearing, adhering to the principles of natural justice.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer reopened the assessee's case under Section 147 and made an addition of Rs. 31,63,754/- for unexplained cash credits. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A), who confirmed the assessment on merits.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was denied principles of natural justice by the CIT(A) due to non-appearance, and if a fresh opportunity for hearing should be granted.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
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
O R D E R MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member) This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058562981 (1) dated 07.12.2023. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Namakkal for the assessment year 2011-12 passed u/s.144 rws 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), vide order dated 10.12.2018.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and has filed the return of income but failed to explain sources for the cash credits. Therefore, on the basis of AIR information the case of the assessee has been reopened u/s 147 of the Act. The AO has passed order under section 144 r.w. section 147 of the Act dated 10.12.2018 making an addition of Rs.31,63,754/- towards unexplained/unproven deposits in bank account.
Aggrieved by the action of the ld. Assessing Officer, the appellant filed appeal against the order under section 144 r.w. section 147 of the Act dated 10.12.2018 before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the assessee did not appear before the first appeal authority. Accordingly, the assessment was confirmed on merits against which assessee is in further appeal before us.
Before us, the ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that Ld. CIT(A) had not followed the principles of natural justice. Ld. Counsel for the appellant further prayed that if an adequate opportunity of hearing is given to appellant, appellant would prosecute its case properly before the Ld. CIT(A).
On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to appear before the ld. first appellate authority.
We heard the rival contention and perused the material on record. Though we concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice and grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee subject to cost of Rs.5000/- which shall be deposited by the assessee within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order to ‘Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority’ at Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The proof of the same will be furnished by the Assessee before Ld. CIT(A). 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 on merits.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in for assessment year 2011-2012 is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 6th May, 2024 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026