M.Karuppiah, Sivagangai V. ITO, Karaikudi

CO 140/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0322 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 08-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S VIDYA
• Assessee Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI .. , ! , ' #$ BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 2672/MDS/2014 & C.O. NO. 140/MDS/2014 (IN I.T.A. NO. 2672/MDS/2014) ' % &% / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(1), KARAIKUDI. V. SHRI R. KARUPPIAH, NO.2, SORKAVASAL ST. PALLATHUR, SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT 630 108. PAN : ANFPK 9928 D (!(/ APPELLANT) (*+!(/ RESPONDENT & CROSS-OBJECTOR) !( , - / APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.V. SREEKANTH, JCIT *+!( , - / RESPONDENT BY : MS. S. VIDYA, CA . , / / DATE OF HEARING : 05.02.2015 01& , / / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05.02.2015 / O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OB JECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATE D 28.8.2014 PASSED BY LD CIT(APPEALS)-I, MADURAI AND THEY RELAT E TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2 I.T.A. NO. 2672/MDS/2014 C.O. NO. 140/MDS/2014 2. THE PENALTY OF ` 10.00 LAKHS LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 271D OF THE ACT, HAVING BEEN CANCELLED BY THE L D CIT(APPEALS), THE REVENUE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE D ECISION OF LD CIT(APPEALS). THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE CROSS OBJ ECTION TO SUPPORT THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(APPEALS). 3. WE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE REVENUE, INTER ALIA, HAS RAISED A GROUND RELATING TO VIOLATI ON OF RUE 46A OF THE IT RULES IN ENTERTAINING A NEW PLEA WITHOUT CONFRON TING THE SAME TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. A PERUSAL OF THE PENALTY OR DER WOULD SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH ANY EXPLANA TION FOR RECEIVING LOAN OF ` 10.00 LAKHS FROM CLOSE RELATIVES BY WAY OF CASH IN VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 269SS OF THE ACT. HOWEVE R, BEFORE LD CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED AN EXPLANA TION TO THE EFFECT THAT HE HAS BORROWED MONEY FROM CLOSE RELATI VES TO REPAY THE LC CREDIT FACILITIES AVAILED FROM THE BANK. WE NOT ICE THAT THE LD CIT(APPEALS) HAS DELETED THE PENALTY BY ACCEPTING T HE SAID EXPLANATIONS ON THE FACE OF IT WITHOUT CAUSING ANY FURTHER EXAMINATION AND ALSO WITHOUT CONFRONTING THE SAME W ITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE SAID ACTION OF LD CIT(APPEALS) RESULTS IN VIOLATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 46A OF THE IT RULES. 3 I.T.A. NO. 2672/MDS/2014 C.O. NO. 140/MDS/2014 4. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING DISCUSSION, WE ARE NOT ABLE TO SUSTAIN THE ORDER PASSED BY LD CIT(APPEALS). ACCOR DINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE SAME AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE W ITH THE DIRECTION TO CONFRONT THE EXPLANATIONS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER, CALL FOR A REMAND REPORT AND THE N DECIDE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW, AFTER AFFORDING N ECESSARY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 5. THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON LY SUPPORTS THE ORDER PASSED BY LD CIT(APPEALS) AND HENCE THE SAME DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY ADJUDICATION. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVEN UE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND THE CROSS OBJE CTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED ACCORDINGLY IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER CO NCLUSION OF HEARING ON THE 5 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2015. SD/- SD/- ( ! ) ( .. ) (VIKAS AWASTHY) (B.R. BASKARAN) ' /JUDICIAL MEMBER /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, A /DATED, THE 5 TH FEBRUARY, 2015. KRI. 4 I.T.A. NO. 2672/MDS/2014 C.O. NO. 140/MDS/2014 B , *'/C D &/ /COPY TO: 1. !( /APPELLANT 2. *+!( /RESPONDENT 3. . E/ () /CIT(A)-I, MADURAI 4. . E/ /CIT-I, MADURAI 5. FG *'/' /DR 6. GH% I /GF.