Vive Sudhakar, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 244/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3118 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-11-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G CHANDRABABU A DDL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B (SMC) BENCH: CHENNAI , BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO S . 240, 241, 242, 243 & 244 /CHNY/ 20 20 / ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 1997 - 98, 1998 - 99, 1999 - 2000, 2005 - 06 & 2006 - 07 SHRI VIVE SUDHAKAR, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS VN SUDHAGARAN), NO.4, 9 TH CROSS STREET, KAPALEESHWAR NAGAR, NEELANKARAI, CHENNAI 600 0 4 1 . T.N. [PAN: A MDPS 2184A ] VS. THE AS SISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 ( 2 ), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NO.108, NUNGAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD CHENNAI 600 034. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR. S. SRIDHAR , ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : M R . G. CHANDRABABU , A DDL. CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 1 0 . 11 .2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10. 1 1 .20 20 / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO , JUDICIAL MEMBER : TH ESE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSE E ARE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDER S OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 1 8 , CHENNAI IN . ITA NO. 499, 516, 517, 498 & 497/15 - 16 ALL DATED 21.10.2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 1997 - 98, 1998 - 99, 1999 - 2000, 2005 - 2006 & 2006 - 2007 . ITA NO S . 240,241,242,243&244/CHNY/2020 : - 2 - : 2. IN ALL THESE AP PEALS, THERE IS A DELAY OF 19 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT , WHEREIN HE HAS STATED THAT THE PAPERS WERE MISPLACED IN HIS HOUSE AND SUBSEQUENTLY HANDED OVER TO THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT, M/S. A. VENKATAGIRI & COMPANY AND SUBM ITTED THAT THE DELAY IS NEITHER INTENTIONAL NOR W A NT ON , BUT THE CIRCUMSTANCE S WERE BEYOND HIS CONTROL. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND HAD GONE THROUGH THE EN TIRE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT CAUSE TO CONDONE THE DELAY. ACCORDINGLY, THE DELAY IS CONDONED. 5. SO FAR AS THE MERITS OF THE CASE IS CONCERNED IN THE APPEAL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS COMPLETED T HE ASSESSMENT U/S.144 R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 DATED 27.03.2002 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997 - 1998. 6. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE AN ADDITION ON ACC OUNT OF THE UNEXPLAINED CREDITS, UNEXPLAINED DRAWINGS FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED RELEVANT DETAILS. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ITA NO S . 240,241,242,243&244/CHNY/2020 : - 3 - : 7. WHEN THESE APPEALS WERE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT ALL THE DETAILS ARE AVAILABL E WITH HIM AND THAT HE MAY BE PERMITTED TO FILE THE SAME BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE. 8. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 9. WE HAVE HEA RD BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 10. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED U/S.144 R.W.S.147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE TWO ADDIT IONS ON THE GROUND THAT NO DETAILS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. NOW , THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT HE IS READY TO FILE ALL THE DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE. 11. I N THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND BY FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CASE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 18 , CHENNAI AND REMIT BACK THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ADJUDICATE ALL THE APPEALS DE NOVO IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ITA NO S . 240,241,242,243&244/CHNY/2020 : - 4 - : 1 2 . AS THE FACTS IN AL L THESE APPEALS ARE SIMILAR AND THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ARE ALSO SIMILAR , THEREFORE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 18 IN ALL THESE APPEALS ARE SET ASIDE AND REMITTED BACK TO THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DE NOVO. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO FILE ALL THE DETAILS WITHOUT FAIL WHEN THE DATE IS GIVEN FOR HEARING BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THUS , THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE . 1 3 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL S OF THE A SSESSEE IN ITA NOS.240, 241, 242, 243 & 244/CHNY/2020 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 10 TH NOVEMBER , 20 20 IN CHENNAI. SD/ - ( ) ( V. DURGA RAO ) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI, / DATED: 10 TH NOVEMBER , 2020 IA, SR. PS / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / CIT(A) 4. / CIT 5. / DR 6. / GF