GROW RICH FOUNDATION,THANJAVUR V. ACIT, NCC-13(1, CHENNAI

ITA 105/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Grow Rich Foundation appealing against an ex parte order from the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed a substantial addition made by the AO under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that they did not receive the notices from the CIT(A) as they went into the 'SPAM' account, leading to their non-response. The Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in TIN Box Co. v. CIT, decided to grant another opportunity to the assessee for presenting their case, emphasizing the need for fair hearing and due process.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 398244 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Other Referred Cases: TIN Box Co. v. CIT [2001] 249 ITR 216 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIVA SRINIVAS
• Assessee Lawyers: G.TARUN
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ \u0001यायपीठ, चे ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0001ी एबी टी. वक , ाियक सद\u0011 एवं एवं एवं एवं \u0001ी मनोज क ुमार अ\u0019वाल, लेखा सद\u0007 क े सम BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.105/Chny/2025 िनधा\u000eरण वष\u000e/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Grow Rich Foundation, C/o Shri S.S. Sundaram, 241, South Street, Karukkadipatti, Orathanadu Taluk, Tanjore District – 614 902. v. The ACIT, Non-Corporate Circle-13(1), Chennai. [PAN: AAJFG 9794 L] (अपीलाथ\u0016/Appellant) (\u0017\u0018यथ\u0016/Respondent) अपीलाथ\u0016 क\u001a ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.G. Tarun, Advocate \u0017\u0018यथ\u0016 क\u001a ओर से /Respondent by : Mr.Shiva Srinivas, CIT सुनवाईक\u001aतारीख/Date of Hearing : 29.04.2025 घोषणाक\u001aतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 04.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(A)”), Delhi, dated 18.11.2024 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as \"AY”) 2013-14. 2. At the outset, it was brought to our notice that the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) is an ex parte order. Further, it was also brought to our notice that the AO has passed the best judgment assessment u/s.144 of ITA No.105/Chny/2025 (AY 2013-14) Grow Rich Foundation :: 2 :: the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘). Thus, according to the Ld.AR, both the authorities have passed ex parte order qua assessee. According to the assessee, notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC had gone into the ‘SPAM’ account, therefore, the assessee was not aware of the existence of such notices issued to him. In the absence of any response from assessee to his notices, the Ld.CIT(A) has confirmed huge addition made by the AO in ex parte proceedings. Therefore, the Ld.AR pleaded for one more opportunity to be granted for it and has undertaken to appear and present all the relevant documents before the AO by citing the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TIN Box Co. v. CIT reported in [2001] 249 ITR 216 (SC). 3. Per contra, the Ld.DR doesn’t want us to give one more innings to the assessee. 4. Having heard both the parties and after perusing the records, we note that the impugned order is an ex parte order since the assessee didn’t respond to the Ld.CIT(A)’s three (3) notices. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the AO without going into the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee as contemplated under sub- section (6) of section 250 of the Act. Therefore, we don’t countenance the impugned action of the Ld.CIT(A) and are inclined to set aside the impugned order. Further, taking note of the fact that the AO has also ITA No.105/Chny/2025 (AY 2013-14) Grow Rich Foundation :: 3 :: passed an ex parte order, we are of the view that one more opportunity need to be granted to the assessee as directed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TIN Box Co. (supra). 5. In the light of the aforesaid facts, we restore the assessment back to the file of the AO with a direction to de novo assess the income of the assessee. The assessee is directed to file relevant documents to substantiate the queries raised by him. The Ld.AR of the assessee has given e-mail ID his to avoid ex parte actions which is noted as: [e-mail]. In this regard, a cost of Rs.10,000/- is imposed which the assessee should remit to the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court, and produce necessary proof of depositing of the same before the AO and thereafter, the AO need to give three opportunities to the assessee and in case, if the assessee fails to furnish the documents/written submissions within the time given, then the AO is at liberty to pass order in accordance to law. The aforesaid id may also be considered by the AO while issuing notices to assessee to ensure participation during assessment proceedings. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 04th day of June, 2025, in Chennai. ITA No.105/Chny/2025 (AY 2013-14) Grow Rich Foundation :: 4 :: Sd/- (मनोज क ुमार अ\u0019वाल) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखा सद\u0003य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- (एबी टी. वक ) (ABY T. VARKEY) \u0005याियक सद\u0003य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे ई/Chennai, !दनांक/Dated: 04th June, 2025. TLN आदेश क\u001a \u0017ितिलिप अ$ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. \u000eथ /Respondent 3. आयकरआयु\u0014/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड फाईल/GF "