SRI NEHRU BAZAAR SWEATAMBER MURTI PUKAJ JAIN SANGH TRUST, CHENNAI V. ITO NCW 12(1), CHENNAI

ITA 1348/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5369 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 20-09-2021
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G JOHNSON
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , C B ENCH, CHENNAI , . , % BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI G.MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1348/CHNY/2019 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) SRI NEHRU BAZAAR SWETAMBER MURTI PUKAJ JAIN SANGH TRUST, 242 A, KILPAUK GARDEN ROAD, CHENNAI-600 010. VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD-12(1) CHENNAI. PAN: AAITS 6772K ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : NONE /RESPONDENT BY : MR. G.JOHNSON, ADDL.CIT /DATE OF HEARING : 20.09.2021 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.09.2021 / O R D E R PER G.MANJUNATHA, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGA INST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A-13, CHENNAI DATED 01.12. 2019 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. AT THE OUTSET, WE FIND THAT APPEAL FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS TIME BARRED BY 2 DAYS. SINCE IT IS A MEAGER D ELAY, WE CONDONE DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE , AFTER HEARING LEARNED DR, AND ADMIT THE SAME FOR ADJUDI CATION. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF AP PEAL:- 2 ITA NO.1348/CHNY/2019 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) CONCURRING THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED AS SESSING OFFICER IS AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND PRINCI PLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE TRUST IS A RELIGIOUS C HARITABLE TRUST WITH A JAIN TEMPLE IN IT. 3. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE CORPUS DONATION AND HU NDI COLLECTIONS WERE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK. 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FAILED TO UNDERSTAND THE FACT THAT THE ARBITRARY ADDITION OF ALL THE CASH DEPOSITS WAS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 4. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A RELIGIOUS CHARITABLE TRUST. THE ASSESSEES CASE WAS REOPENED U/S.143 R.W.S 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE WITH THE DEPARTMENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED MORE THAN RS.10 LAKHS IN SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT DURING FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10 RELEVANT TO ASSESSME NT YEAR 2010-11. THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED U/S.144 R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, ON 28.12.2017 AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION OF RS.32,46,00 0/- TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT IN SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT U/S.68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED A N APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), BUT COULD NOT APPEAR WHICH IS EV IDENT FROM 3 ITA NO.1348/CHNY/2019 PARA 3 OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) ORDER THAT DESPITE NUM BER OF OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING WAS PROVIDED, BUT THE ASSES SEE NEITHER APPEARED NOR FILED ANY DETAILS. THEREFORE, THE CIT( A) DISPOSED OFF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EX-PARTE BY FOLLO WING CERTAIN JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS, INCLUDING DECISION OF THE HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PV T.LTD. 38 ITD 320(DEL). AGGRIEVED BY THE CIT(A) ORDER, THE ASSESS EE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE HEARD LE ARNED DR AND PERUSED MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ADMI TTEDLY, ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER AS WELL AS APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) ARE EX- PARTE, THE ASSESSEE NEITHER APPEARED NOR FURNISHED ANY DETAILS TO JUSTIFY CASH DEPOSITS MADE IN SAVINGS BANK ACCO UNT. BUT, FACT REMAINS THAT ON PERUSAL OF APPELLATE ORDER, THE LEA RNED CIT(A) DISMISSED APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-PROS ECUTION WITHOUT DISCUSSING THE ISSUE ON MERITS. NO DOUBT, T HE APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS LEFT WITH NO OPTION, BUT TO DISPOSE O FF APPEAL, WHEN THE APPELLANT HAS NOT APPEARED DESPITE NOTICE OF HE ARING WAS PROVIDED, BUT SUCH APPEAL SHOULD BE DISPOSED OFF ON MERITS ON 4 ITA NO.1348/CHNY/2019 THE BASIS OF MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THIS CASE, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISPOSED OFF ON TECHNICAL GROUN DS FOR NON- PROSECUTION WITHOUT CONSIDERING ISSUE ON MERITS. TH EREFORE, TO GIVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE, THE APP EAL IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT(A) TO DECIDE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL ON MERITS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 SD/- SD/- ( ) ( . ) (MAHAVIR SINGH) (G. MANJUNATHA ) / VICE-PRESIDENT % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ' /CHENNAI, ( / DATED 20 TH SEPTEMBER, 2021 DS *+ ,+ /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. - () /CIT(A) 4. - /CIT 5. + 1 /DR 6. /GF .