BANUMATHY EDUCATIONAL SERVICE TRUST,THANJAVUR V. ITO, EXEMPTIONS, WARD, TRICHY

ITA 1228/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Banumathy Educational Service Trust, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2020-21. The primary contention was the rejection of fresh evidence by the CIT(A) under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, which the assessee argued was crucial for deciding the appeal. The Tribunal noted that the statutory notices were issued during the COVID-19 lockdown, a period affected by general exemptions extending limitation periods for legal proceedings. The Tribunal emphasized the principles of natural justice, particularly the right to be heard (Audi alteram partem), and found that the CIT(A) was not justified in rejecting the fresh evidence without considering its merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 706082 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Rules, 1962
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIJAY KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: T.VASUDEVAN
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Period of limitation; Principle of natural justice; Time period of passing order; Audi alteram partem
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जगदीश, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ । Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Jagadish, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1228/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Banumathy Educational Service Trust, Best matriculation School, Mariamman Koil Road, Bye Pass Rountana, Thanjavur 613 001. [PAN:AABTB6646G] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward, Trichy. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Vijay Kumar, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 18.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 30.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10.01.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 30 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we I.T.A. No.1228/Chny/25 2 find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 3. The only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in dismissing the appeal by rejecting the fresh evidences filed by the assessee. 4. We note that the assessment was completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] dated 23.09.2022 by making various additions against which the assessee preferred further appeal before the ld. CIT(A). By rejecting the fresh evidence filed under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee as the assessee has no sufficient cause for not filing the same before the Assessing Officer. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The ld. AR Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate drew our attention to second para page 3 of the impugned order and submits that most of the statutory notices dated 29.06.2021, 09.11.2021, 11.12.2021, 17.02.2022 & 07.09.2022 issued by the Assessing Officer are during Covid-19 lockdown period. He further submits that the fresh evidence filed before I.T.A. No.1228/Chny/25 3 the ld. CIT(A) during appellate proceedings is a Bank account extract which is a crucial document essential for deciding the fate of the issues raised in the grounds of appeal of the assessee before the ld. CIT(A). He vehemently argued that Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules cannot be over ride the principles of natural justice and thus, prayed for suitable directions to the ld. CIT(A) to accept the fresh evidence and adjudicate the issue on merits. 6. The ld. DR Shri Vijay Kumar, JCIT submits that the admission of additional evidence under rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules is not automatic and it is the duty of the assessee to properly make out a reasonable case in order to show that the conditions prescribed under rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules have been satisfied and supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 7. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that against the assessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 23.09.2022, the assessee preferred further appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and also filed fresh evidence during the course of appellate proceedings. Since the assessee could not file the additional evidence before the Assessing Officer, the ld. CIT(A) summarily rejected the fresh evidence and dismissed the appeal of the I.T.A. No.1228/Chny/25 4 assessee without adjudicating the issues on merits. We find force in the contentions of the ld. AR that the statutory notices issued by the Assessing Officer are mostly during Covid-19 lockdown period, pertains to the period of general exemption provided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its judgement dated 10.01.2022 in Miscellaneous Petition No.21 of 2022 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No.3 of 2020 extending limitation period applicable for all proceedings before Courts and Tribunals across the country on account of spread of Covid-19 infections w.e.f.15.03.2020, till 28.02.2022. Further, the principle “Audi alteram partem”, i.e., no man should be condemned unheard is the basic canon principles of natural justice and accordingly, we find merit in the contentions of the ld. AR that Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules cannot be over ride the principles of natural justice. Hence we are of the view that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in refusing to admit the fresh evidence furnished by the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings. Since the assessee was not given opportunity to contradict the findings given by the Assessing Officer by not admitting the additional evidence, we are of the view that the ld. CIT(A) should re-adjudicate the issues afresh by admitting the additional evidence. Accordingly, we set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and restore the issues to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with the direction to admit the additional evidence that may be furnished by the I.T.A. No.1228/Chny/25 5 assessee. After admitting the same, the ld. CIT(A) may call for the remand report from the Assessing Officer. After confronting with the remand report, if any, that may be furnished by the Assessing Officer with the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) shall pass order in accordance with law by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is at liberty to furnish the documentary evidences and explanation to substantiate its case before the ld. CIT(A). Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 30th June, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (JAGADISH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 30.06.2025 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. "