NANU RAJEES,KANNUR vs. ITO - WARD 4, KANNUR RANGE, KANNUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 894/COCH/2022Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 January 2023AY 2005-06Bench: SMT. BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member), Ms. PADMAVATHY S. (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A). The appeal was remitted back to the CIT(Appeals) for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2005-06 was dismissed for non-submission of details. The CIT(A) had upheld the AO's additions including interest on loans, unexplained investments, and income from other sources.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard by the CIT(A) and whether the merits of the additions made by the AO should be considered.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH : COCHIN

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & Ms. PADMAVATHY S.

For Appellant: Shri Anand V.S., Advocate
For Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi, Sr. AR
Hearing: 12.01.2023Pronounced: 20.01.2023

Date of hearing : 12.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 20.01.2023 O R D E R

Per Padmavathy S, Accountant Member:

1.

This appeal is against the order of CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi [NFAC], Delhi, dated 22.7.2022. for the assessment year 2005-06.

2.

The assessee filed the return of income for AY 2005-06 on 6.9.2005 declaring a total income of Rs.1,58,370. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) on 14.9.2005. Subsequently the assessment was reopened u/s 147 and a notice u/s. 148 was issued on the assessee. The assessee in response to notice u/s. 148 filed a return of income on 4.8.2011 disclosing a total income of Rs.1,58,370. The AO concluded the reassessment by making the following additions:-

(i) Interest on loans considered as used for personal purposes – Rs.34,746 (ii) Unexplained investments – Rs.6,31,000 (iii) Income from Other Sources – Rs.24,000 3. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for the reason that despite several opportunities the assessee did not make any submission with regard to the impugned addition and therefore upheld the order of the AO. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on the ground that no opportunity of being heard was given to the assessee before the CIT(A) and also on merits.

4.

During the course of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that the assessee be given an opportunity of being heard before the CIT(A) who did not consider the merits of the case. The ld. DR did not raise any objections to this request made by the ld. AR. Accordingly in the interest of justice, we remit the appeal back to the CIT(Appeals) to give one more opportunity to the assessee to submit the relevant documents with regard to various additions/disallowances made. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

5.

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

Pronounced in the open court on this 20th day of January, 2023.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →