P.Sugumar, Arakkonam V. ITO Ward 3, Vellore

ITA 2682/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5517 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 08-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Source of fund; Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , , ' BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / .I.T.A. NOS. 2682 & 2683/CHNY/2017 /ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2011-12 & 2012-13 SHRI P. SUGUMAR, 15, SAKTHI VINAYAKAR KOIL STREET, THAKKOLAM VILLAGE, ARAKKONAM 631 151. [PAN: BNLPS 4298F] VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, VELLORE. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE B Y : SHRI. SALAI VARUN, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, ADDL. CIT $ /DATE OF HEARING : 18.09.2018 $ /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.11.2018 / O R D E R PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE FILED THESE APPEALS AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-13, CHENNAI IN ITA NOS. 44 & 47/CIT(A)-13/11-12 & 12-13 DATED 30.03.2017 FOR ASS ESSMENT YEARS 2011- 12 & 2012-13, RESPECTIVELY. :- 2 -: ITA NOS. 2682 & 2683/CHNY/2017 2. THE APPEALS ARE DELAYED BY 152 DAYS AND HENCE TH E ASSESSEE FILED CONDONATION PETITION SUBMITTING, INTER ALIA, THAT H E IS 60 YEARS OLD, DIABETIC AND HEART PATIENT WITH FREQUENT HEALTH SETBACKS. F URTHER, HIS FATHER WAS ADMITTED WITH SIGNS OF HEART ATTACK AND HE HAD TO T AKE CARE, HIS BUSINESS WAS HARD HIT, HE WAS FACING HUGE FINANCIAL IMPEDIME NTS. DUE TO VARIOUS DIFFICULTIES & CONFUSIONS, THE DELAY OCCURRED WHICH WAS BEYOND HIS CONTROL. THE DELAY IS NEITHER WILFUL OR WANTON. PLEADED THA T IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE, THE DELAY MAY BE CONDONED. 3. WE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS. ON THE FACTS AN D CIRCUMSTANCES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE, SUPRA, AND IN THE INTERE STS OF JUSTICE, WE CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS FOR BOTH AS SESSMENT YEARS. 4. THE AR SUBMITTED THAT SHRI. P. SUGUMAR, THE ASSE SSEE, MANUFACTURING & SELLING BRICKS, TRANSPORTS SAND, BR ICKS AND BLUE METAL. THERE WAS A SURVEY IN HIS BUSINESS PREMISES AND THE ASSESSEE WAS FOUND NOT TO HAVE FILED RETURNS FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011 -12 & 2012-13, RESPECTIVELY. THE AO ISSUED NOTICES U/S.S 148, 142 , 144 AND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENTS FOR BOTH ASSESSMENT YEARS U/S. 144 R.W.S. 147 ADDING THE ENTIRE CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS AS THE ASSESSEE S INCOME IN BOTH OF THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THOSE ORDERS, THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEALS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) DISM ISSED THE APPEALS. AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE FILED THESE APPEALS. :- 3 -: ITA NOS. 2682 & 2683/CHNY/2017 5. THE AR PLEADED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT GIVIN G EFFECTIVE OPPORTUNITY AND CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEES ALTERNAT E PLEA ETC., ON THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE EXPARTE BY THE AO, DISPOSED TH E APPEALS AND HENCE PLEADED TO AFFORD AN OPPORTUNITY FOR EFFECTIVE HEAR INGS. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR COUNTERED THE SUBMISSIONS STATING THAT THE ASSES SEE DID NOT CO-OPERATE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE LD. CIT(A) SOUGHT REMAND REPORTS FROM THE AO, FURNISHED A COPY TO THE ASSESS EE AND AFTER CONSIDERING ASSESSEES REPLY DISPOSED THE APPEALS. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE AO SUBMITTED REMAND REPORT WITHOUT DUE OPP ORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE LD. CIT(A) SIMPLY BASED HIS DECISI ONS ON SUCH REPORTS AND HENCE SOUGHT DUE JUSTICE. 6. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THE FACTS REMAI N THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE RETURNS, ON SURVEY IT WAS FOUND THAT H E IS HAVING MULTIPLE SOURCES OF INCOME. THOUGH HIS BANK ACCOUNTS SHOW H UGE CREDITS, THE ASSESSEE MERELY FILED RETURNS ESTIMATING THE INCOME WHICH WAS NOT ACCEPTED IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENTS. THOUGH, THE ASSESSEE MADE VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS, THE FACTS AND ASSOCIATED CIRCU MSTANCES HAVE NOT BEEN EXPLAINED AND ENQUIRED INTO. IN THE FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES, WE DEEM IT FIT TO SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND R EMIT BOTH THE ASSESSMENTS TO THE AO FOR A FRESH, DENOVO, EXAMINAT ION. THE ASSESSEE SHALL LAY RELEVANT MATERIALS IN SUPPORT OF ITS CO NTENTION BEFORE THE AO AND COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE AO IN ACCOR DANCE WITH LAW. THE :- 4 -: ITA NOS. 2682 & 2683/CHNY/2017 AO IS FREE TO CONDUCT APPROPRIATE ENQUIRY AS DEEMED FIT, BUT HE SHALL FURNISH ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSSEE ON T HE MATERIAL ETC TO BE USED AGAINST IT AND DECIDE THE MATTERS IN ACCORDAN CE WITH LAW. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEALS IN ITA NOS . 2682 & 2683/CHNY/2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011-12 & 2012- 13 ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON FRIDAY, THE 02 ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, ) /DATED: 02 ND NOVEMBER, 2018 JPV $*+,-, /COPY TO: 1. / /APPELLANT 2. *0/ /RESPONDENT 3. 1 ) ( /CIT(A) 4. 1 /CIT 5. ,* /DR 6. 4 /GF