SMT. JOYECE PREMALATHA, CHENNAI V. ITO, NCW - 13 (3), CHENNAI

ITA 1994/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6349 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N ARJUN RAJ
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 13

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI , , BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA , ACCOUNTA NT MEMBER ITA NO . 1993 /CHNY/ 20 19 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 13 - 2014 SHRI JOHN SUKUMAR EBENEZAR, NO.22/155, VANNIAR STREET, TRUST PURAM, CHOOLAIMEDU, CHENNAI 600 035. [PAN: AA PPE 6779B ] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON - CORPORATE WARD 13(3), CHENNAI - 600 034. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 1994 /CHNY/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013 - 2014 SMT. JOYECE PREMALATHA, OLD NO.20/1, NEW NO.57, VANNIAR STREET, CHOOLAIMEDU, CHENNAI 600 094. [PAN: A IGPJ 0688P ] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON - CORPORA TE WARD 13(3), CHENNAI 600 034. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR. N. ARJUNRAJ, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : MR. AR.V. SREENIVASAN, ADDL. CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 2 6 .08.2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 6 .08.2020 / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO , JUDICIAL MEMBER : THESE ARE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE S AGAINST SEPARATE ORDER S OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 7 , CHENNAI IN I.T.A NO. 12(T - 14)/CIT(A) - 7/2018 - 19 & I.T .A. NO.7(T - 14)/CIT(A) - 7/2018 - 19 BOTH DATED 31.05.2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 13 - 2014 RESPECTIVELY . ITA NO S . 1993 & 1994 /CHNY/20 19 : - 2 - : 2 . MR. N. ARJUNRAJ, ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE S AND MR. AR.V. SREENIVASAN, ADDITIONAL CIT R EPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE . 3. WHEN THESE TWO APPEALS ARE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE S HA D SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) PASSED EX - PARTE ORDER S AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE S COUL D NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) , AS CIRCUMSTANCES WERE BEYOND HIS CONTROL. HE PRAYED THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR CASE S BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ). 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTIONS. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 6. WE FIND THAT THE LEARN ED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD PASSED DIFFERENT EX - PARTE ORDER S BOTH DATED 31.05.2019 . WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND ALSO BY FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE , ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSE SSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER S OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND REMIT THE MATTER S BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) TO PASS A FRESH ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. WE FURTHER OBSERVE THAT THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE S IS DIRECTED TO ITA NO S . 1993 & 1994 /CHNY/20 19 : - 3 - : APPEAR BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WHEN THE DATE IS GIVEN FOR HEARING WITHOUT FAIL. IN VIEW OF THE ABO VE, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE S ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 7 . IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEAL S OF THE ASSESSEE S IN I.T.A. NO. 1993 & 1994 /CHNY/20 19 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. OR DER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 6 TH AUGUST, 2020 IN CHENNAI. SD/ - ( ) ( G. MANJUNATHA ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / CHENNAI, / DATED: 2 6 TH AUGUST , 2020 IA, SR. PS SD/ - ( ) ( V. DURGA RAO ) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / CIT(A) 4. / CIT 5. / DR 6. / GF