A.R. Vinod Kumar, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 2127/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7913 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 04-10-2016
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R DURAI
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . , . , BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO. 2127/MDS/2013 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :20 0 1 - 0 2 SHRI A.R. VINOD KUMAR [R. VINODKUMARAN NAIR], NO. 18, STROTTER MUTHIAH STREET, SOWCARPET, CHENNAI 600 079 [PAN: A A HPV6172H ] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX , CO MPANY CIRCLE 1 ( 3 ) , CHENNAI . ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : S HRI R. DURAIPANDIAN , J CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 04 . 1 0 .201 6 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 30. 11 .201 6 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : TH I S APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( APPEALS )(C) II, CHENNAI DATED 3 1. 1 0.201 3 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001 - 02. IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 11 GROUNDS, BUT, THE MAIN GROUND RAISED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DECIDING THE APP EAL I.T.A. NO . 2127 /M/ 1 3 2 WITHOUT FURNISHING THE COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT IN VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF SPICES I.E., JEERA AND SAUNF AND ALSO DERIVING INCOM E FROM SALARY. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 27.02.2002 DECLARING INCOME OF .2,48,220/ - . THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [ ACT IN SHORT] BY ASSESSING TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT .24,77,002/ - AFTER MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS. 3. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). AFTER CONSIDERING THE DETAILED SUBMISSI ONS, THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPE AL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND THE SAME WERE FORWARDED FOR VERIFICATION. WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR FILING REPLY TO THE REMAND REPORT , THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IS TOTALLY AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 5. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE COPY OF THE RE MAND REPORT WAS FORWARDED TO THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 08.02.2010 FOR HIS I.T.A. NO . 2127 /M/ 1 3 3 COMMENTS/REPLY. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY SUBMISSION, BY CONSIDERING THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND BASED ON THE REPORT ON THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERITS AND STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT IS AN A DMITTED FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FORWARDED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION. ON PERUSAL OF THE REMAND REPORT ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT NEITHER THE ASSESS EE NOR HIS COUNSEL APPEARED DURING THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE BOTH ON THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS ON THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. AFTER OBTAINING THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER, A COPY OF THE SAME WAS FORWARDE D TO THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 08.02.2010. INSPITE OF HAVING BEEN ALLOWED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES AT BOTH APPELLATE STAGE AS WELL AS DURING THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT AVAILED THE OPPORTUNITY AND THE DECEPTIONAL ATTITUDE BY FILING AD DITIONAL EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FURNISHED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ARE NOT ENOUGH SOUND. HOWEVER, BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS PLEADED THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT TO MEET THE ENDS I.T.A. NO . 2127 /M/ 1 3 4 OF NATURAL JUSTICE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO CONSIDER THE EVIDENCES AND DECIDE THE ISSUES AFRESH AFTER ALLOWING AN OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. IF THE ASSESSEE FAILS TO AVAIL THE OPPORTUNITY, THEN THE ADDITIONS MADE VIDE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 19.03.2004 AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 31.10.2013 STAND SUSTAINED. THUS, THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 30 TH NOVEMBE R , 201 6 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 30 . 11 .201 6 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CI T(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.