KANNAN YADAV PARTHASARATHI,CHENNAI vs. ITO,NON CORPORATE WARD-10(3), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1379/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 January 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI V. DURGA RAO (Judicial Member), SHRI MANJUNATHA. G (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal subject to a cost of Rs. 2,000/-. The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee an opportunity to file their accounts and financial statements.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was delayed by 150 days. The assessee sought condonation of delay due to the sudden demise of their guardian, which prevented them from appearing before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without providing an opportunity to the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without affording an opportunity to the assessee is sustainable.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI MANJUNATHA. G

Hearing: 29.01.2024Pronounced: 29.01.2024

आदेश / O R D E R

Per V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], New Delhi dated 02.05.2023 relevant to the Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

The appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 150 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, for which, the assessee has filed a 2 -: petition for condonation of the delay in the form of an affidavit. The Ld.

D.R objected for condoning the delay. We have gone through the affidavit filed by the assessee and find that there is a sufficient cause for condoning the delay subject to payment of cost of Rs.2,000/-. The same shall be paid by the assessee to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order and produce the receipt before the A.O. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.

3.

So far as the merits of the case is concerned, the learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order on 02.05.2023 and submitted that the assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) as the circumstances were beyond his control. He further prayed that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to substantiate his case before the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

On the other hand the learned Departmental Representative has not raised any objection to the submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee.

5.

We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below.

6.

On perusal of Form 35 by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) it is apparent that due to sudden demise of assessee’s guardian, he has sought for one more opportunity towards submission of account and financial statement etc. however, without affording any opportunity, the ld. CIT(A) has passed an exparte appellate order. Therefore, in the interest of natural justice, the assessee shall be given an opportunity for filing accounts and financial statements etc. before the assessing authority. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of A.O to afford an opportunity of filing accounts and financial statements etc., by considering the same he shall pass the assessment in accordance with law. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 29th January, 2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →