, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! ' # , % #& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1931/CHNY/2018 ) *) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 15, CHENNAI - 600 034. V. SHRI NALLAPPA REDDIAR KANNADASAN, OLD NO.39, NEW NO.41, GANGAI ST., KALAKSHETRA COLONY, BESANT NAGAR, CHENNAI - 600 090. PAN : AAQPK 8571 Q (,-/ APPELLANT) (./,-/ RESPONDENT) ,- 0 1 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. NATARAJA, JCIT ./,- 0 1 / RESPONDENT BY : NONE 2 0 3% / DATE OF HEARING : 06.06.2019 45* 0 3% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.06.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -15, CHENNAI, DATED 28.02.2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2. NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF SERV ICE OF NOTICE OF HEARING BY RPAD. THE REGISTRY HAS PLACED ON RECORD THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEE AS PROOF OF SERVICE OF 2 I.T.A. NO.1931/CHNY/18 NOTICE ON THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, WE HEARD THE LD . DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPE AL ON MERIT. 3. SHRI S. NATARAJA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT TWO ISSUES ARISE FOR CONSIDERATION IN THIS APP EAL. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE FIRST ISSUE IS WITH REGARD TO ADDITIO N ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE IN UNSECURED LOANS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 AND 2014-15. THE OTHER ADDITION IS WITH REGARD TO UNEXPLAINED INVEST MENT. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY MATERIAL B EFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, SOME MATERIALS WERE PRODUCED BEF ORE THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS), ACCORDING TO THE L D. D.R., WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HA S DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THEREFORE, ACCORDIN G TO THE LD. D.R., THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS VIOLATED THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD. D.R., WE HAVE CAREFULLY GON E THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(APPEALS) AND THE ASSESSING OFFICE R. AS RIGHTLY SUBMITTED BY THE LD. D.R., THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED F RESH MATERIAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHICH WERE NOT FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER. THE CIT(APPEALS) APPARENTLY HAS NOT GIVEN ANY OPPORTUNI TY TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONTROVERT THE FRESH MATERIAL FILED BEFO RE HIM. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE IS A CLEAR VIOLATION OF RULE 46A OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962. THE CIT(APPEALS ) OUGHT TO HAVE CALLED FOR REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPECT OF THE NEW 3 I.T.A. NO.1931/CHNY/18 MATERIAL FILED BEFORE HIM. SINCE SUCH AN EXERCISE WAS NOT DONE BY THE CIT(APPEALS), THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BE LOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE- EXAMINE THE MATTER IN THE LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL THAT WAS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS) AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE A SSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 14 TH JUNE, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ' # ) ( . . . ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (N.R.S. GANESAN) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 7 /DATED, THE 14 TH JUNE, 2019. KRI. 0 .389 :9*3 /COPY TO: 1. ,- /APPELLANT 2. ./,- /RESPONDENT 3. 2 ;3 () /CIT(A)-15, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-6, CHENNAI 5. 9< .3 /DR 6. =) > /GF.