K.R.Subramanian, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1581/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9288 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 09-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N MADHAVAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Capital asset
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A B ENCH, CHENNAI . , . , # $ BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G.PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1581/MDS/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05) MR. K.R.SUBRAMANIAN, 38, MAPLE COURT, OLD MURPHY STREET, AKKARAI, CHENNAI - 600 119. VS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-III(1), C HENNAI - 34. PAN: ANJPS3907Q ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR. S.SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : MR. N.MADHAVAN, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 19 TH MAY, 2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 RD MAY, 2016 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM:- THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APP EALS)- III, CHENNAI DATED 24.03.2014 IN ITA NO.1469/2013- 14 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 AND 250(6) O F THE ACT. 2. AT THE OUTSET, LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), WITHOUT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPP ORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, HE PLEADED THAT ONE MORE OPPOR TUNITY 2 ITA NO.1581/MDS/2014 MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE NECESSA RY DETAILS TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). 3. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ON THE O THER HAND, VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AND ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. FROM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WE FIND THAT H E HAD DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE / A.R. TO FILE THE DETAILS OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN REGARD TO H IS CAPITAL ASSET. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SUBMITTED THE SAME AND THEREFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X (APPEALS) PASSED THE ORDER BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE BEFORE HIM. NOW, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTAT IVE IS PLEADING BEFORE US STATING THAT THE LEARNED COMMISS IONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS NOT PROVIDED SUFFICIENT OP PORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. WE DO NOT FIND MERI T IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE . 3 ITA NO.1581/MDS/2014 HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE HEREBY REMI T BACK THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER WITH DIRECTION TO VERIFY THE GENUINESS AND VALIDITY OF T HE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE ON HIS CAPITAL ASSET BASED ON THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND ANY OTHER FRESH EV IDENCE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER PASS APPRO PRIATE ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW & MERIT, AFTER PROVIDI NG SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. WE ALSO CAUTION THE ASSESSEE AND HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE THAT IF THEY FAIL TO CO-OPERATE WITH THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BY SEEKING UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENTS, TH E REVENUE AUTHORITIES SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO PASS APP ROPRIATE ORDERS AS PER LAW & MERIT BASED ON THE MATERIALS AV AILABLE BEFORE THEM. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 23 RD MAY, 2016 SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . ) (G.PAVAN KUMAR) ( A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) # % / JUDICIAL MEMBER % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER # /CHENNAI, ( /DATED 23 RD MAY, 2016 4 ITA NO.1581/MDS/2014 SOMU *+ ,+ /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. - () /CIT(A) 4. - /CIT 5. + 1 /DR 6. /GF