Ulaganathan Meyappan, CHENNAI V. ACIT Company Circle 4(2), CHENNAI

ITA 2482/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3283 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-08-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 11-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR CIT
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH: CHENNAI . . , . , BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU R.L. REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2481 & 2482/CHNY/2017 /ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2010-11 & 2011-12 SHRI ULAGAPPAN MEYAPPAN, C/O. SHRI S.SRIDHAR, A.S.SRIRAMAN, NEW NO.14, OLD NO.82, FLAT NO.5, 1 ST AVENUE, INDIRA NAGAR, ADYAR, CHENNAI-600 020. VS. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER- OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-4(2), CHENNAI. [PAN: AACPM 5155 E] ( # /APPELLANT) ( $%# /RESPONDENT) # & / APPELLANT BY : MR. S.SRIDHAR, ADV. $%# & /RESPONDENT BY : MR. R.CLEMENT RAMESH- KUMAR, ADDL.CIT & /DATE OF HEARING : 19.08.2019 & /DT. OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.08.2019 / O R D E R PER SHRI DUVVURU R.L. REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER : BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTE D AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 8, CHENNAI, IN ITA NO.87/13-14 DATED 16.08.2017 FOR THE AY 2010-11 AND IN ITA NO.07/14- 15 DATED 16.08.2017 FOR THE AY 2011-12. 2. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE IN BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSE SSEE IS THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS NOT GIVEN ANY OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND T HE APPEALS FILED BY THE ITA NOS.2481 & 2482/CHNY/2017 :- 2 -: ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) FOR THE AYS 2010-11 & 2011-12. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF IN COME OF RS.7,99,150/- FOR THE AY 2010-11 AND RS.10,15,700/- FOR THE AY 2011-1 2. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND ACCORDINGLY, NOTICES U/ S.143(2) WERE ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. THE LD.AR OF THE ASSES SEE FILED THE DETAILS CALLED FOR AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.AR, THE AO HAD MADE THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS: FOR THE AY 2010-11 FOR THE AY 2011-12 UNDISCLOSED INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY RS.2,26,500/ - - UNDISCLOSED INTEREST INCOME RS.50,001/- RS.12,165/- UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS IN SYNDICATE BANK RS.36,7 1,245/- RS.60,92,100 UNEXPLAINED CREDITS IN KARNATAKA BANK RS.14,50,000/ - RS.23,35,000/- 3. AGGRIEVED ON THE ABOVE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO, T HE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THE APPEALS BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). THE LD .CIT(A) HAS GIVEN SEVERAL OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE BUT HE FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) BY HIMSELF OR HIS REPRESENTATIVE. THEREA FTER, THE LD.CIT(A) PASSED AN EX PARTE ORDER. 4. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THE PRE SENT APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUB MITTED THAT DUE TO ILL-HEALTH OF THE ASSESSEE NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR HIS REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE FURTHE R SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS A FAIR CHANCE TO SUCCEED THE CASES. HENCE, HE PLEADED FOR ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND HIS APPEALS BEFORE THE LD.CIT (A). ON THE OTHER ITA NOS.2481 & 2482/CHNY/2017 :- 3 -: HAND, THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS GI VEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE BUT HE FAILED TO APPE AR BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) AND HENCE, CONFIRMED THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD.CI T(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MATERI ALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES B ELOW. 7. ADMITTEDLY, THE LD.CIT(A) BY RELYING ON THE DECISI ON OF THE HONBLE ITAT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULTIPLAN (INDIA) PVT. LTD., REPORTED IN 38 ITD 320 (DEL) HAD PASSED AN EX PARTE ORDER. CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) ONLY DUE TO ILL-HEALTH OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO IN ORDER TO MEET THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE FIRM VIEW THAT ONE M ORE OPPORTUNITY TO BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO DEFEND HIS CASES BEFORE TH E LD.CIT(A). ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATE WITH THE LD.CIT(A), W ITHOUT ASKING UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENTS. CONSEQUENTLY, THE GROUN DS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 21 ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2019, IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( - . . . / ) (DUVVURU R.L. REDDY) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.2481 & 2482/CHNY/2017 :- 4 -: /CHENNAI, 1 /DATED: 21 ST AUGUST, 2019. TLN & $23 43 /COPY TO: 1. # /APPELLANT 4. 5 /CIT 2. $%# /RESPONDENT 5. 3 $ /DR 3. 5 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF