Venkatesh Rajgopal, CHENNAI V. ACIT Company Circle 1(3), CHENNAI

ITA 2167/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5872 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 18-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Rectification of order; Set aside
• Section: 154; 143(1)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी वी. दुगाŊ राव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी मनोज कु मार अŤवाल, लेखा सद˟ के समƗ । Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2167/Chny/2018 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Venkatesh Rajgopal, ‘Vidyanjali, No. 10, Rajgopalan 2 nd Street, Valmiki Nagar, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai 600 041. [PAN: ADFPR6333R] Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle 1(3), Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथŎ /Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri G. Johnson, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 15.12.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.12.2021 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 4, Chennai, dated 27.04.2018 relevant to the assessment year 2009-10. 2. The appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by ten days, for which, the assessee has filed a petition for condonation of the delay in support of an affidavit, to which; the ld. DR has not raised any serious objection. Consequently, since the assessee was prevented by I.T.A. No. 2167/Chny/18 2 sufficient cause, the delay of ten days in filing of the appeal stands condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. When the appeal was taken up for hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Assessing Officer, by order dated 25.10.2011 passed rectification order under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] by raising demand of ₹.3,42,060/- against the order under section 143(1) of the Act. It was further submission that the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and submitted before him that as per section 154(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer has to issue a notice before passing the order. It was further submission that no such notice has been issued by the Assessing Officer. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has further submitted that without considering the ground raised by the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) simply confirmed the rectification order. Thus, the ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that an opportunity should be given to the assessee before the Assessing Officer to substantiate his case. 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR fairly accepted that the issue may be remitted back to the Assessing Officer. 4. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. We find that under section 154(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer is bound to issue show- I.T.A. No. 2167/Chny/18 3 cause notice before passing rectification order under section 154 of the Act. However, in this case, no such notice has been issued by the Assessing Officer. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has raised a ground that no notice has been issued. However, without considering the ground raised by the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) concluded his order on merits. In our opinion, an opportunity should have been given to the assessee before passing order under section 154 of the Act. In view of the above, we set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the issue afresh after giving notice to the assessee and considering his reply thereon. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 22 nd December, 2021 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, the 22.12.2021 Vm/- आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant, 2.ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुᲦ (अपील)/CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुᲦ/CIT, 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध/DR & 6. गाडᭅ फाईल/GF.