Rajah Muthiah Chettiar Charitable and Educational Trust, CHENNAI V. DDIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1692/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 96398 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 12-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 22-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR U ANJANEYULU
• Assessee Lawyers: R VIJAYARAGHAVAN
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 11

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A B ENCH, CHENNAI . , ! # , $ & BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1692/MDS/2015 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) M/S. RAJAH MUTHIAH CHETTIAR CHARITABLE & EDUCATIONAL TRUST RANI SEETHAI HALL BUILDING, 603, ANNA SALAI, 5 TH FLOOR, CHENNAI-600 006. VS THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-I CHENNAI-34. PAN:AAATR3208F ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR.R.VIJAYARAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : DR.U.ANJANEYULU, CIT /DATE OF HEARING : 12 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 / O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-17, CHE NNAI DATED 28.05.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUNDS ON MERIT S. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE RAISED A SPECIFIC GROUND STAT ING THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN ENHAN CING THE ASSESSMENT BY WITHDRAWING EXEMPTION UNDER SECTI ON 11 WHICH HAD BEEN GRANTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WI THOUT 2 ITA NO.1692/MDS/2015 GIVING PROPER NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE AS REQUIRED UN DER THE ACT. 3. AT THE OUTSET, COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) IS BAD IN LAW FOR THE REASON THAT HE PASSED THE OR DER WITHOUT GIVING NOTICE FOR ENHANCEMENT WITHDRAWING THE EXE MPTION GRANTED UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSEE . 4. THE AVERMENT OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THA T NO NOTICE ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) BEFORE DENYING EXEMPTION HAS NOT BEEN REBUTTED BY T HE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 5. HEARD BOTH SIDES. PERUSED ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHOR ITIES. THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS . LOTTE INDIA CORPORATION LTD. ( 290 ITR 248) HELD THAT COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS THE POWER TO ENHANCE TH E ASSESSMENT. HOWEVER, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE EXERCISED T HE POWER CONFERRED UNDER SECTION 251(2) OF THE ACT WIT HOUT GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AGA INST SUCH ENHANCEMENT. ON GOING THROUGH THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WE FIND THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HELD THAT 3 ITA NO.1692/MDS/2015 ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 & 12 OF THE ACT. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SHOULD NOT HAVE DENIED EXEMPTION UNDE R SECTION 11 WITHOUT PROPER NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS THERE IS VIOLATION OF P RINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGN ED ORDER AND RESTORE THE ISSUES BACK TO THE FILE OF THE COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR DE NOVO CONSIDERATION, AFT ER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO TH E ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH NOVEMBER, 2015. SD/- SD/- ( # ) ( & (# ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) ( CHALLA NAG ENDRA PRASAD ) * / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( * / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( /CHENNAI, , /DATED 27 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 SOMU ./ 0/ /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3. 1 () /CIT(A) 4. 1 /CIT 5. / 5 /DR 6. /GF .