G. RAJAGOPALAN, CHENNAI V. ITO, NCW - 7 (3), CHENNAI

ITA 2250/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0757 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 06-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: T N SEETHARAMAN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 44AD; 250; 201

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A (SMC) BENCH: CHENNAI , BEFORE SH RI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 2 250 /CHNY/ 201 9 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 201 1 - 1 2 SHRI G. RAJAGOPALAN C/O T.N. SEETHARAMAN, ADVOCATE NO.384 (OLD NO.196), LLOYDS ROAD, CHENNAI 600 086. [PAN: A DYPR 3710R ] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON - CORPORATE WARD - 7(3), 121, NUNGAMBAKKAM ROAD, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI 600 034. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI T.N. SEETHARAMAN, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : SH RI A.R.V. SREENIVASAN , JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 08.06 .2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.06 .20 20 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 7 , C HENNAI IN APPEAL NO. I.T.A. NO. 154/CIT(A) - 7/2018 - 19 DATED 28.06 .201 9 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 1 - 201 2 . ITA NO. 2 250 / CHNY / 201 9 : - 2 - : 2. SHRI T.N. SEETHARAMAN, ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI A.R.V. SREENIVASAN, JC IT REPRE SENTED ON BEHALF OF THE R EVENUE . 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A SEVENTY - SEVEN YEARS OLD INDIVIDUAL , WHO IS DOING A MINOR ELECTRICAL CONTRACT BUSINESS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT ADMITTEDLY , NOTIC E U/S.148 HA D BEEN ISSUED ON THE ASSESSEE TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT RESPONDED. SUBSEQUENTLY ON 0 7.12.2018, A SHOW - CAUSE NOTICE HAD BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE , WHEREIN THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD PROPOSED TO ASSESS THE INCOME OF RS.11,16,303/ - . IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSMENT CA ME TO BE COMPLETED U/S.144 R.W.S.147 ON 17.12.2018, WHEREIN THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ADDED THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE , INVESTMENT IN BONDS AND DEBENTURES AND THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS ESTI MATED AT THE RATE OF 20% OF RS.27,06,516/ - WHICH WAS TREATED AS THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 2011 ON 25.03.2019, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAD COMPUTED HIS TOTA L INCOME FROM THE BUSINESS BY APPLYING THE P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 44AD OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE , HAVING BEEN DETERMINED IN THE SHOW - CAUSE NOTICE AT RS.11,16,303/ - , THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSEES INC OME BEING FAR ABOVE THE SAID AMOUNT WAS ERRONEOUS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ITA NO. 2 250 / CHNY / 201 9 : - 3 - : LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL WITHOUT CONSIDERING ANY OF THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS A PRAYER THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GRANTED AN OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. IN REPLY, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). IT W AS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ABSOLUTELY NON - COOPERATIVE AND EVEN AFTER THE SHOW - CAUSE NOTICE HAS BEEN ISSUED, THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FILE HIS RETURN. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE RETURN NOW FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AN INVALID RETURN. IT WAS A PRAYER THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) BE UPHELD. 5 . I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES THROUGH VIDEO - CONFERENCING AND CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 6. ADMITTEDLY, THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 25.03.2019 IS AN INVALID RETURN. HOWEVER, THE EVIDENCES AS AVAILABLE IN THE SAID RETURN SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN HIS INCOME TO BE DETERMINED BY APPLYING THE P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 44AD OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SHOWN THE INCOME UNDER THE HEAD, OTHER SOURCES BEING INTEREST ON THE FIXED DEPOSIT RECEIPTS AT RS.8,03,258/ - . THIS INCOME ADMITTEDLY HAD NOT ITA NO. 2 250 / CHNY / 201 9 : - 4 - : BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ASSESSMENT WHICH COULD BE O N ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT THE EVIDENCE WAS NOT AVAILABLE BEFORE HIM. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS. THE ASSESSEE HAS TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF THE DEPOSITS, WHETHER IT IS FROM HIS BUSINESS OR WHETHER IT IS IN THE NATURE OF LOANS. THIS BEING SO, IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL MUST BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFF ICER FOR RE - ADJUDICATION AND I DO SO. 7 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A. NO. 2 250 /CHNY/2019 IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH JUNE , 20 20 IN CHENNAI. SD/ - ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI, / DATED: 8 TH JUNE , 2020 IA, SR. PS / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / CIT(A) 4. / C IT 5. / DR 6. / GF