Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY
आदेश / O R D E R
PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 31.01.2014 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income I.T.A.No.968 /Mds/2014 :- 2 -: . Tax(A)(C)-II, Chennai and its relates to the assessment year 2009- 2010.
The learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the assessee could not furnish various details that were called by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) during the course of appellant proceedings for the reasons beyond the control of assessee.
Hence, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has adjudicated the issue argued before him on the basis of materials available on record. The learned counsel submitted that the assessee should be given one more opportunity to furnish all the materials before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) lest the assessee should suffer huge losses. Accordingly, he prayed that entire material may kindly be set aside to the file of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
On the contrary, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee was given sufficient opportunity by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and accordingly objected to the plea put forth by leaned Authorised Representative.
We have heard rival contentions and perused the records.
Admittedly, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has I.T.A.No.968 /Mds/2014 :- 3 -: . passed impugned order on the basis of material available on record, without hearing the assessee. We noticed that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has given more than one opportunity to the assessee to furnish materials called for by him.
However, the assessee failed to furnish the same and hence the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) was constrained to pass order. At the same time, we find some merit in the plea of the learned Authorised Representative. Hence, in the interest of justice, we are inclined to accept the plea of the learned Authorised Representative subject to payment of cost. Accordingly, we direct the assessee to pay the cost of �5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the credit of Income Tax Department on or before 16th February, 2015. Subject to the payment of above said amount, we set aside the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and restore all the material to his file with a direction to examine them afresh after giving adequate opportunity of hearing being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to furnish all the details that may be called by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) without fail.
I.T.A.No.968 /Mds/2014 :- 4 -: . 5. In result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced on the 4th day of February, 2015 at Chennai.