RAFEENA SULTHANA, POLLACHI V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (APPEALS) , DELHI

ITA 1340/CHNY/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0317 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 21-07-2024
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” ायपीठ चे ई म । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ी महावीर िसंह, उपा ! एवं माननीय ी मनोज कुमार अ%वाल ,लेखा सद( के सम!। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.1340/Chn y/2024 (िनधा)रण वष) / As sessment Year: 2013-14) Sahul Hameed Rafeena Sulthana 72, Thirunilakandar Street, Pollachi-642 001. बनाम/ Vs . ITO CHE-W(63)(95) Chennai. थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AXNPR-5371-D (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri D.Anand (Advocate)-Ld. AR थ कीओरसे/Respondent by : Ms. Samantha Mullamudi (Addl.CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 22-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 08-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 30-03- 2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act on 07-09-2021. Upon perusal of assessment order, it could be seen that the assessment has been framed on best judgment basis making addition of cash deposits of Rs.63.63 Lacs. The assessee failed to appear during first appeal proceedings and accordingly, the assessment was confirmed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 2. The Ld.AR has submitted that the assessee work as consultant for regional transport office and collects commission from vehicle owners. For the fee payable to RTO, the owners give cash to him which he remit to bank and pay road tax, fees etc. The Ld. AR pleaded for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities to substantiate the same which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. 3. Though the assessee has remained negligent, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with disposal of appeal on merits on the basis of material on record. 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 8 th August, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा34 / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद6 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे8ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated :08-08-2024 DS आदेशकीIितिलिपअ%ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. थ /Respondent 3. आयकरआयु@/CIT Chennai. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडEफाईल/GF