KARUPPAN GOMATHI,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO,WRD-2, NAMAKKAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 280/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 May 2024AY 2017-18Bench: 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 acknowledging the assessee's negligence, granted another opportunity for de novo adjudication on merits to uphold natural justice. This is subject to the assessee depositing Rs. 5,000/- within 30 days.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for a delay of 594 days. The original assessment was framed under Section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act on a best judgment basis, with an addition of Rs. 114.10 Lacs on account of cash deposits.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be admitted despite a significant delay, and the merits of the addition made on a best judgment basis.

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) 2017- 18 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 21-01-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act on 24-03-2022. 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.114.10 Lacs. The position remained the same during first appellate proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A) did not admit the appeal for want of condonation of delay of 594 days. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. Sr. DR has pleaded for dismissal of the appeal.

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 on merits without raising the issue of delay and 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 (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) "ाियक सद4 / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद4 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 01-05-2024 DS आदेशकीSितिलिपअ/ेि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 →