ARGALAM ASSOCIATES ,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 15(1), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal granted the assessee another opportunity to present its case, emphasizing the principle of natural justice. This opportunity is conditional upon the assessee depositing Rs. 10,000/- within 30 days and will result in a de novo assessment.
What were the facts?
The assessee failed to attend the first appellate proceedings, leading to the confirmation of assessments made by the Assessing Officer under Section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act. The Assessing Officer had made additions for unexplained money.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case before the appellate tribunal despite prior negligence, and the implications of such an opportunity on the assessment proceedings.
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
Heard together (4 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aforesaid appeals by assessee for Assessment Years (AY) 2013- 14 to 2016-17 arise out of separate orders of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] all dated 20-12-2023 in the matter of separate assessments framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act. In the assessment orders, Ld. AO has made addition of unexplained money. Upon perusal of impugned orders, it could be seen that the assessee has failed to attend first appellate proceedings and accordingly, the assessments have been confirmed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.
The Ld. AR sought another opportunity of hearing which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. 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. The same would come at a cost of Rs.10,000/- 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 shall be furnished by the assessee to learned AO who shall proceed for de novo assessment for all the years after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith failing which Ld. AO shall be at liberty to frame the assessment on the basis of material on record.
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 →- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026