C. DHANANJAYAN,SALEM vs. ITO, WARD-1(9),, SALEM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 278/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 May 2024AY 2012-13Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, while noting the assessee's negligence and delay, granted a final opportunity for de novo adjudication by the CIT(A) on payment of costs, to uphold principles of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 was dismissed by the CIT(A) after the AO framed assessment on a best judgment basis, adding cash deposits of Rs. 24.96 Lacs. The assessee did not appear at any stage of the proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case despite significant negligence and delay in proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

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 Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2012- 13 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 13-03-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act on 28-11-2019. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. However, it emerges that the assessment has been framed on best judgment basis making addition of cash deposit of Rs.24.96 Lacs. The position remained the same during first appellate proceedings and accordingly, the assessment was confirmed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. Sr. DR has pleaded for dismissal of the appeal. The registry has noted a delay of 265 days in the appeal which stand condoned.

2.

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.5,000/- 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 CIT(A) who shall proceed for de novo adjudication after affording reasonable 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.

3.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 1st May, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) �ाियक सद# / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 01-05-2024 DS आदेशकीHितिलिपअ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent

3. आयकरआयु=/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →