, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , !' .$%$&, ( ') BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2735/CHNY/2017 & +& / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SHRI S. MOHAMED LABIER, NO.6, GREAMS ROAD, CHENNAI - 600 006. PAN : ADEPM 8539 M V. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 8, CHENNAI - 600 034. (-./ APPELLANT) (/0-./ RESPONDENT) -. 1 2 / APPELLANT BY : NONE /0-. 1 2 / RESPONDENT BY : SMT. RUBY GEORGE, CIT 3 1 4( / DATE OF HEARING : 14.06.2018 56+ 1 4( / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.06.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -8, CHENNAI, DATED 13.10.2017, PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE I NCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2 I.T.A. NO.2735/CHNY/17 2. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE BY RPAD. THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES RETURNED THE NOTICE WITH AN ENDORSEMENT NO SUCH PERSON. IT IS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO GIVE CORRE CT ADDRESS SO AS TO ENABLE THIS TRIBUNAL TO SERVE THE NOTICE ON THE ASS ESSEE. THIS TRIBUNAL HAS NO MACHINERY TO TRACE OUT THE CORRECT ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND SERVE THE NOTICE. THEREFORE, WE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PROCEEDED TO DISPOS E OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT. 3. SMT. RUBY GEORGE, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID HUGE INTEREST TO VARIOUS TRUSTS. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE TRUSTS WERE APPARENT LY CONSTITUTED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THREE MINOR CHILDREN OF THE ASSESSEE , THEREFORE, THE INTEREST HAS TO BE ADDED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESS EE. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT EXAMINI NG THESE FACTS, HAS ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS N OT EXAMINED THE MATTER PROPERLY. HENCE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. D .R., THE ORDER OF ASSESSMENT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTERESTS OF REVEN UE AND ALSO ERRONEOUS. ACCORDINGLY, THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER IN EXERCISE OF HIS ADMINISTRATIVE POWER UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE A CT, SET ASIDE THE 3 I.T.A. NO.2735/CHNY/17 ORDER OF ASSESSMENT AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFI CER TO REDO THE ASSESSMENT. 4. WE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. D.R. AND PER USED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST MADE TO VARIOUS TRUSTS WAS NOT EXAMINED BY THE ASSE SSING OFFICER. THERE WAS NOT EVEN A REFERENCE ABOUT THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST TO VARIOUS TRUSTS, WHICH WERE SAID TO BE ESTABLISHED F OR THE BENEFIT OF THREE MINOR CHILDREN OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THE AS SESSING OFFICER HAS NOT APPLIED HIS MIND AND BROUGHT ON RECORD THE ACTUAL FACTS, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE PRIN CIPAL COMMISSIONER HAS RIGHTLY FOUND THAT THE ORDER OF TH E ASSESSING OFFICER IS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTERES TS OF REVENUE. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO REDO THE AS SESSMENT AS DIRECTED BY THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER IN THE IMPUG NED ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON T O INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SA ME IS CONFIRMED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 4 I.T.A. NO.2735/CHNY/17 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 19 TH JUNE, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( !' .$%$& ) ( . . . ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ( / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 8 /DATED, THE 19 TH JUNE, 2018. KRI. 1 /49: ;:+4 /COPY TO: 1. -. /APPELLANT 2. /0-. /RESPONDENT 3. THE ITO, NON CORPORATE WARD -11(2) 4. :< /4 /DR 5. =& > /GF.