GOPALAKRISHNAN SRIVNIVASAN,CHENNAI vs. AO, NCW 19(7), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 33/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 April 2024AY 2017-18Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeal for de novo adjudication. The assessee was granted another opportunity to be heard and explain the delay.

What were the facts?

The assessee is in appeal against additions made for AY 2017-18. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A), and the appeal was not admitted due to a delay. The ITAT noted the assessee's absence and the delay in filing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in not admitting the appeal due to delay without granting a proper hearing. The principle of natural justice was considered.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘सी’ �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ/वाल ,लेखा सद3 एवं माननीय +ी मनु कुमार िग7र, �ाियक सद3 के सम8। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Gopalakrishnan Srinivasan ITO बनाम/ 53/25, Perumal Koil Street, Non- Corporate Ward-19(7) Vs. Saidapet, Chennai-600 015. Chennai. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. BGAPS-8386-Q (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� कीओरसे/ Appellant by : None � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16-04-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 16-04-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aggrieved by confirmation of certain addition for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, the assessee is in further appeal before us. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. The Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal on the ground that the appeal was not admitted by Ld. CIT(A) for want of condonation of delay of 43 days. It emerges that the assessment has been framed u/s 144 r.w.s.147 of the Act. Upon perusal of para 4 of the impugned order, it could be seen that the assessee has not attended the appellate proceedings as well and Ld. CIT(A) has not admitted the appeal of the assessee. The registry has noted delay of 6 days in the appeal, which stand condoned.

2.

Though we concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith and also explain the delay in filing of appeal. 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 16th April, 2024.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →