, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! ' , $ '% BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1563/CHNY/2018 ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 SMT. BALASUBRAMANIAN MANJU, M.R. GARDEN BUILDING, NO.18, KANNAN STREET, KADAPERI VILLAGE, TAMBARAM SANATORIUM, CHENNAI - 600 047. PAN : ALBPM 0301 L V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 9(1), CHENNAI - 600 034. (+,/ APPELLANT) (-.+,/ RESPONDENT) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE -.+, / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT 1 / 2$ / DATE OF HEARING : 31.12.2018 34) / 2$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.01.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -10, CHENN AI, DATED 28.03.2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2. SHRI S. SRIDHAR, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE OF 5,46,72,875/- 2 I.T.A. NO.1563/CHNY/18 ONLY ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT APPEAR ED BEFORE HIM. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE APPEAL WAS NOT DI SPOSED OF ON MERIT. 3. WE HEARD SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS) FOUND THAT THE ASSE SSEE DID NOT COOPERATE DURING THE SCRUTINY PROCEEDING AND SHE DI D NOT APPEAR BEFORE HIM WHEN THE APPEAL WAS POSTED FOR HEARING O N SEVERAL DATES. THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) BEIN G THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND HAVING JURISDICTION COTERMI NOUS WITH THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IS EXPECTED TO CALL FOR RECO RDS FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND REAPPRECIATE THE MATERIAL AVA ILABLE ON RECORD AND DECIDE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE N ON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) WILL NOT EM POWER THE CIT(APPEALS) TO DISMISS THE APPEAL. A PERUSAL OF T HE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) SHOWS THAT HE HAS NOT REA PPRECIATED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND THERE WAS NO DISCU SSION IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON MERIT. 4. THIS TRIBUNAL TIME AND AGAIN FOUND THAT THE CIT( APPEALS) HAS NO AUTHORITY OR POWER TO DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON -APPEARANCE OF 3 I.T.A. NO.1563/CHNY/18 THE ASSESSEE. IN CASE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPEARE D BEFORE HIM OR FAILED TO COOPERATE WITH THE CIT(APPEALS), IT IS OPEN TO THE CIT(APPEALS) TO CALL FOR RELEVANT RECORD FROM THE A SSESSING OFFICER TO RECONSIDER THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND DISPOSE THE APPEAL ON MERIT. SUCH AN EXERCISE WAS NOT DONE BY THE CIT(APPEALS). THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS UNABLE T O UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS). ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) IS SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS) SHALL RE-EXAMINE TH E MATTER IN THE LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE CI T(APPEALS) SHALL GIVE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE BY IS SUING NECESSARY NOTICE OF HEARING. IN CASE THE ASSESSEE FAILS TO A PPEAR BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE, IT IS OPEN TO THE CIT(APPEALS) TO CALL FOR RELEVANT RECORD FROM THE A SSESSING OFFICER AND REAPPRECIATE THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD A ND PASS A SPEAKING ORDER WITH REGARD TO ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 5. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, THE APPEAL OF THE AS SESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4 I.T.A. NO.1563/CHNY/18 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 2 ND JANUARY, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ' ) ( . . . ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 6 /DATED, THE 2 ND JANUARY, 2019. KRI. / -278 98)2 /COPY TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT 2. -.+, /RESPONDENT 3. 1 :2 () /CIT(A)-10, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-7, CHENNAI 5. 8; -2 /DR 6. <( = /GF.