ACIT Central Circle 3(1), CHENNAI V. Estate of Late Mani Shanmugham rep by his wife and legal heir Smt Saraswathi, CHENNAI

ITA 1190/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7279 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 25-04-2019
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 06-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HIS WIFE
• Assessee Lawyers: T VASUDEVAN ADV MR B SAGADEVAN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI , ! . , ! ' BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NOS.1113, 1114 TO 1119/CHNY/2018 /ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2015-16, 2009-10 TO 2014-15 SMT.SARASWATHI, L/H. OF (LATE) SHRI M. SHANMUGAM, 25, NEHRU STREET, KAMRAJ NAGAR, REDHILLS, CHENNAI-600 052. [PAN: AZFPS 9641 F] VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER- OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI-600 034. ( ) /APPELLANT) ( *+) /RESPONDENT) ./ ITA NOS.1185 TO 1191/CHNY/2018 /ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2009-10 TO 2015-16 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER- OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI-600 034. VS. ESTATE OF LATE MANI- SHANMUGAM REP. BY HIS WIFE AND L/H SMT.SARASWATHI, 25, NEHRU STREET, KAMRAJ NAGAR, REDHILLS, CHENNAI-600 052. [PAN: AZFPS 9641 F] ( ) /APPELLANT) ( *+) /RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : MR.T.VASUDEVAN, ADV. DEPARTMENT BY : MR.B.SAGADEVAN, JCIT - /DATE OF HEARING : 25.04.2019 - /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.04.2019 ITA NOS.1113 TO 1119/CHNY/2018 & ITA NOS.1185 TO 1191/CHNY/2018 :- 2 -: / O R D E R PER BENCH : ITA NOS.1113/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE A SSESSEE AND ITA NO.1191/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-19, CHE NNAI, IN ITA NOS.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 DATED 04.01.2018 FOR THE AY 2015-16. ITA NOS.1114/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AND ITA NO.1185/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-19, CHE NNAI, IN ITA NOS.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 DATED 04.01.2018 FOR THE AY 2009-10. ITA NOS.1115/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AND ITA NO.1186/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-19, CHE NNAI, IN ITA NOS.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 DATED 04.01.2018 FOR THE AY 2010-11. ITA NOS.1116/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AND ITA NO.1187/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-19, CHE NNAI, IN ITA NOS.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 DATED 04.01.2018 FOR THE AY 2011-12. ITA NOS.1117/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AND ITA NO.1188/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-19, CHE NNAI, IN ITA NOS.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 DATED 04.01.2018 FOR THE AY 2012-13. ITA NOS.1118/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AND ITA ITA NOS.1113 TO 1119/CHNY/2018 & ITA NOS.1185 TO 1191/CHNY/2018 :- 3 -: NO.1189/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-19, CHE NNAI, IN ITA NOS.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 DATED 04.01.2018 FOR THE AY 2013-14. ITA NOS.1119/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AND ITA NO.1190/CHNY/2018 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-19, CHE NNAI, IN ITA NOS.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 DATED 04.01.2018 FOR THE AY 2014-15. AS ALL THESE APPEALS ARE INTERCONNECTED, THEY ARE BEIN G DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. SHRI B.SAGADEVAN, JCIT, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND SHRI T.VASUDEVAN, ADV., REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF TH E ASSESSEE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO WAS DOING BUSINESS OF RUNNING A CHIT AND GIVING LOA NS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVING LOANS ON CO MMISSION BASIS. THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED COMMISSION @3%. IT WAS A SUBMISS ION THAT THERE WAS A SEARCH ON THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 17.11.2 014 AND THE SEARCH WAS EFFECTIVELY COMPLETED ON 30.01.2015. THE ASSES SMENT CAME TO BE COMPLETED U/S.143(3) R.W.S.153B ON 30.12.2016, WHER EIN, THE AO HAD MADE SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS BY TREATING THE ADVANCES WHICH HAD BEEN GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE ON COMMISSION BASIS AS UNACCOUNTED ADVANCES. SIMILARLY, VARIOUS OTHER ADDITIONS HAD ALSO BEEN MADE REPRESEN TING INVESTMENTS, ITA NOS.1113 TO 1119/CHNY/2018 & ITA NOS.1185 TO 1191/CHNY/2018 :- 4 -: JEWELLERY AND IN RESPECT OF THE CHIT BUSINESS OF TH E ASSESSEE. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT NOTICE U/S.142(1) WAS ISSUED FOR TH E FIRST TIME ON 29.04.2016, WHEREIN, THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS ALSO CALLED FOR. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD EXPIRED IN JUNE, 2 015. THE ASSESSEES LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SMT. SARASWATHI HAD COMPLIED W ITH THE SEARCH ASSESSMENTS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT AS THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE PROCEDURE INVOLVED, EVEN THE COPIE S OF SEARCH DOCUMENTS HAD NOT BEEN COLLECTED. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT C ONSEQUENTLY, THERE WAS NO EFFECTIVE REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESS EE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE LEGAL RE PRESENTATIVE IS NOT EDUCATED ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATIONS AND COMPLICATIONS OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. IT WAS A PRAYER THAT NOW SHE IS BE ING ASSISTED BY COMPETENT COUNSELS. IT WAS A PRAYER THAT THE ISSUE S IN ALL THE APPEALS INCLUDING THE REVENUE APPEALS COULD BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AND THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE ABLE TO P RODUCE SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCES FROM THE SEIZED MATERIALS ITSELF AS ALSO FROM THE AVAILABLE RECORDS WITH THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS A PRAYER THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GRANTED AN OPPORTUNITY IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL J USTICE. 4. IN REPLY, THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT THE OPPORTUNI TIES HAD BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS AND OT HER THAN ASKING FURTHER DETAILS, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN ANY EVI DENCES IN THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.DR THAT EVEN THE LD.CIT(A) ITA NOS.1113 TO 1119/CHNY/2018 & ITA NOS.1185 TO 1191/CHNY/2018 :- 5 -: HAS GRANTED SUBSTANTIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE WHIC H IS ALSO LIABLE TO BE REVERSED. IT WAS HOWEVER, FAIRLY AGREED BY THE LD.D R THAT THE SEARCH DOCUMENTS HAD NOT BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESS EE AS THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT ASKED FOR THE SAME. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. 6. ADMITTEDLY, THE SEARCH DOCUMENTS AND THE EVIDENC ES FOUND IN THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASS ESSEE FOR REBUTTAL. CLEARLY, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CONTAINS EVIDENCES CO LLECTED OUT OF THE SEARCHED MATERIAL AND THIS HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN TO TH E ASSESSEE. THIS BEING SO, IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ORDERS OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND THAT OF THE AO FOR ALL THE AYS ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ISS UES IN THESE APPEALS ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION DE NOVO AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND FO R FURNISHING THE EVIDENCES AS REQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR SUBSTANTI ATING THEIR CLAIMS. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E & THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 25 TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019, IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( S. JAYARAMAN ) ! /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) ! /JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.1113 TO 1119/CHNY/2018 & ITA NOS.1185 TO 1191/CHNY/2018 :- 6 -: /CHENNAI, 2 /DATED: 25 TH APRIL, 2019. TLN - *34 54 /COPY TO: 1. ) /APPELLANT 4. 6 /CIT 2. *+) /RESPONDENT 5. 4 * /DR 3. 6 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF