Rickdah Sivakumar, CHENNAI V. DCIT Non Corporate Circle 14, CHENNAI

ITA 1358/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5072 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NETHRA PAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . , . , BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1358/CHNY/2019 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 & S.P. NO. 156/CHNY/2019 [IN I.T.A.NO.1358/CHNY/2019] SHRI RICHDAH SIVAKUMAR, NO. 3/604, II CROSS STREET, LAKSHMANA PERUMAL NAGAR, KOTTIVAKKAM, CHENNAI 600 041. [PAN: AAAPS8303G] VS. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 14, CHENNAI. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI Y. SRIDHAR, C.A. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI M.S. NETHRA PAL, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 17.05.2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.05.2019 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) 7, CHENNAI, DATED 30.03.2019 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. BESIDES, CHALLENGING THE GROUND ON MERITS, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT PROPER SERVICE OF NOTICE OF HEARING. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME FOR I.T.A. NO. 1358/CHNY/19 & S.P. NO. 156/CHNY/19 2 THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 ON 21.12.2013 ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF .58,14,330/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [ACT IN SHORT], WHERE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE AN ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF .1,04,21,848/- BY USING THE TERMS DEBIT AND CREDIT TOWARDS PURCHASE AND SALE OF LAND. 3. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). SINCE, THERE WAS NO REPRESENTATION FROM ASSESSEES SIDE, THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE FINDINGS IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 4. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE NOTICES OF HEARING WERE RETURNED UNSERVED DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE HAS BEEN A CHANGE IN RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMISSION THAT IT WAS ONLY WHEN THE ORDER COPY WAS SENT VIA E-MAIL, THE ASSESSEE WAS AWARE ABOUT THE NON-SERVING OF THE NOTICE. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMISSION THAT HAD THE NOTICE BEEN SERVED VIA E-MAIL, THE SAME COULD HAVE BEEN ATTENDED TO EARLIER BY THE ASSESSEE. THOUGH WE AGREE WITH THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL, IT IS THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO BRING TO THE NOTICE OF THE DEPARTMENT IN CASE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS. IN FACT, I.T.A. NO. 1358/CHNY/19 & S.P. NO. 156/CHNY/19 3 WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN HIS E-MAIL ID IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE DEPARTMENT WOULD HAVE SENT THE NOTICE OF HEARING THROUGH E-MAIL. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GIVEN REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). BEING SO, WE DIRECT THE LD. CIT(A) TO GIVE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRESENT HIS CASE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 6. SINCE WE HAVE ADJUDICATED THE MAIN APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, THE STAY PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS AND ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND THE STAY PETITION IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 17 TH MAY , 2019 IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (DUVVURU RL REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, 17.05.2019 VM/- /COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT, 2. / RESPONDENT, 3. ( ) /CIT(A), 4. /CIT, 5. /DR & 6. /GF.