Ramesh Narayanan, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 1637/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: 163721714 RSA 2015
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 25-09-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 16-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A B KOLI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAMESH NARAYANAN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL S M C BENCH, CHENNAI ... , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1637/MDS/2015 ' #$' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 SHRI RAMESH NARAYANAN, NO.7, 5 TH FLOOR, T.A. ENCLAVE, NO.43A, VELACHERY MAIN ROAD, VIJAYANAGAR, CHENNAI - 600 034 PAN : AEOPR 1622 P V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD XV, CHENNAI - 600 034. (&'/ APPELLANT) (()&'/ RESPONDENT) &' * + / APPELLANT BY : SHRI RAMESH NARAYANAN ()&' * + / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.B. KOLI, JCIT , # * -. / DATE OF HEARING : 25.09.2015 /0$ * -. / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.10.2015 / O R D E R THE APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE O RDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-4, CHENNAI, DA TED 25.03.2015 IN ITA NO.43/2013-14. THE APPEAL ARISES OUT OF THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE IN COME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 2 I.T.A. NO.1637/MDS/2015 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SIX GROUNDS AGAINST ORDE R OF CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN PASSING AN EX PARTE AND NON-SPEAKING ORDER. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS AN INDIVIDUAL, FILED INCOME-TAX RETURN FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2006-07 ON 15.09.2006 ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF ` 2,03,505/- AND THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE ACT. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND WAS TRANSFERRE D FROM ACIT, CIRCLE XV THROUGH NOTIFICATION NO.1566/JCIT/R.XV/08 -09 DT. 23.06.2008. SUBSEQUENTLY, NOTICE WAS ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT AND THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE APPEAR ED IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON VARIOUS DATES AND COMPLIE D WITH THE SUBMISSIONS CALLED FOR FROM TIME TO TIME. THE LD. A .O., AFTER CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS, MA DE ADDITIONS OF RECRUITMENT, TRAINING AND INCENTIVE EXPENDITURES, B AD DEBTS WRITTEN OFF CONFIRMATION AND BANK DEPOSITS AND ASSESSED INC OME OF ` 12,19,404/- AND DETERMINED TAX LIABILITY OF ` 4,50,522/-. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE A.O., THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) EXPLAINING THE FACTS AND RA ISED VARIOUS GROUNDS IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCES AND EXPLAINED T HE SOURCE AND SUPPORTED WITH EVIDENCE. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) RELI ED ON THE 3 I.T.A. NO.1637/MDS/2015 DECISIONS OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COU RTS AND CO- ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL AND HAS DRAWN A UNIL ATERAL CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT INTERESTED IN P URSUING THE CASE AND DISMISSED FOR NON-PROSECUTION OF THE APPEAL WIT HOUT CONSIDERING THE INFORMATION IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE EX PARTE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON TH E GROUNDS OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND NON-APPLICATION OF PROCEDURES BY THE CIT(APPEALS) IN PASSING EX PARTE AND NON-SPEAKING ORDER AND THE LD. AR RELIED ON VARIOUS CASE LAWS OF HIGH COURTS A ND SUPREME COURT AND REQUESTED THE TRIBUNAL TO ADJUDICATE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 6. MEANWHILE, THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT WAS PRESSUR IZING FOR PAYMENT OF DEMAND RAISED IN ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ASSESSEE FILED A STAY PETITION BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON 16 TH JULY, 2015. THIS TRIBUNAL HEARD THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE LD. D.R. FOR STAY OF RECOVERY OF OUTSTANDING AMOUNT. T HE MATTER WAS NOT PROSECUTED BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) AND THE CASE IS NOT ADJUDICATED ON MERITS. THE TRIBUNAL PASSED ORDER I N S.P. NO. 382/MDS/2015 DT. 24.07.2015 GRANTING STAY FOR A PER IOD OF SIX 4 I.T.A. NO.1637/MDS/2015 MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF ORDER OR TILL THE DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER. WHILE THE STAY PETITION IS I N FORCE, THE CIT(APPEALS) SUO MOTO HAS DECIDED THE CASE ON MERITS AND ADJUDICATED THE MATTER AND ALLOWED THE APPEAL. 7. THE TRIBUNAL, AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMIS SIONS OF THE LD. COUNSELS AND ALSO INFORMATION PLACED ON RECORD, IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) IN ITA NO.43/CIT(A)-4/2013-14 DATED 18.08.2015 HAS PASSED THE ORDER ON MERITS AND ALLOW ED THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL. THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE A PPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PENDING BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL AND DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE APPEAL, THE RECOVERY OF THE OUTSTANDING AMOU NT WAS STAYED. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT KNOWN HOW THE CIT(APPEALS) PAS SED THE ORDER ON 18.08.2015, WHEN NOTHING WAS PENDING BEFORE HIM. HOWEVER, WITHOUT GOING TO FURTHER REASON, THIS TRIBUNAL IS O F THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED AFRE SH BY THE CIT(APPEALS). ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(AP PEALS) IS SET ASIDE AND THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE REM ITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS) SHA LL EXAMINE ALL THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE SAME I N ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5 I.T.A. NO.1637/MDS/2015 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 16 TH OCTOBER, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( ... ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 2 /DATED, THE 16 TH OCTOBER, 2015. KRI. * (-34 54$- /COPY TO: 1. &' /APPELLANT 2. ()&' /RESPONDENT 3. , 6- () /CIT(A)-4, CHENNAI 4. , 6- /CIT-V, CHENNAI 5. 4#7 (- /DR 6. 8' 9 /GF.