What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the principle of natural justice, granted the assessee another opportunity to present evidence. The issue is restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 4.25 Lacs for unexplained loan due to lack of evidence. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal as no further evidence was provided. The assessee is now appealing this decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was given a fair opportunity to present evidence for the unexplained loan addition.

Polguvan Raja Kumaresh, 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 12-09-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 04-12-2019. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of unexplained loan for Rs.4.25 Lacs for want of evidences from the assessee. 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 impugned issue is restored back to Ld. AO for de novo adjudication 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 आदेशकीSितिलिपअ/ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु=/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF

POLGUVAN RAJA KUMARESH,SALEM vs. ITO, WRD-4, , 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