What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, while noting the assessee's negligence, granted another opportunity for substantiating the case based on the principle of natural justice. The matter was restored to the AO for de novo assessment.

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT concerns an addition of Rs. 26.36 Lacs made by the AO on account of cash deposits. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as the assessee failed to provide further evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity to substantiate the cash deposits and whether the lower authorities erred in dismissing the appeal without granting a further chance.

Anantharani Rajavel, Salem vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2024

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 14-12-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 14-12-2019. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit of Rs.26.36 Lacs. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal since the assessee could not adduce any further evidence. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR has sought another opportunity of hearing which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.

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 orders of lower authorities are set aside and the matter is restored back to Ld. AO for de novo assessment after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith failing which Ld. AO shall be at liberty to proceed with framing of assessment on the basis of material on record.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 1st May, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) �ाियक सद4 / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद4 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 01-05-2024 DS आदेशकीQितिलिपअ/ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु=/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF

ANANTHARANI RAJAVEL,SALEM vs. ITO, WARD 1(6), SALEM

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments