What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering the principle of natural justice, the tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 152 days, citing issues with email notifications. The assessee was unrepresented during the first appellate proceedings where an addition of Rs. 12 Lacs was made for unexplained cash deposits.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity for a fresh assessment due to being unrepresented and issues with communication, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Vettri Vikash Paper Mills… 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 19-07-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 30-12-2019. The registry has noted a delay of 152 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of an affidavit of one of the partners of the assessee-firm. It has been submitted that the notices were sent on dormant email id. Though Ld. Sr. DR opposed condonation of delay, however, considering the period of delay, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.

The Ld. AR pleaded for another opportunity of hearing considering the fact that the assessee remained unrepresented during first appellate proceedings. The Ld. Sr. DR proposed for dismissal of the appeal. In the assessment order, the assessee has been saddled with addition of Rs.12 Lacs since it could not establish the source of cash deposit.

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 make 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 merits.

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 आदेशकीTितिलिपअ/ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु=/CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF

VETTRI VIKASH PAPER MILLS ,COIMBATORE vs. ITO WARD 1, POLLACHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Latest GST High Court judgments