Krishnan Vijaya Mohan, CHENNAI V. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 7(1), CHENNAI

ITA 2760/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0864 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-11-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B SAGADEVAN
• Keywords: Additional evidence

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 ./ ITA NO.2760/CHNY/2018 & S.P. NO.355/CHNY/2018 (IN I.T.A. NO.2760/CHNY/2018) & '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 SHRI KRISHNAN VIJAYA MOHAN, NO.139, 1 ST MAIN ROAD, AMBATTUR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, CHENNAI. PAN : ACDPV 2299 P V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 7(1), CHENNAI. ( APPELLANT& PETITIONER) ()*+,/ RESPONDENT) +,-./ APPELLANT BY : SHRI Y. SRIDHAR, CA )*+,-./ RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B. SAGADEVAN, JCIT / -0' / DATE OF HEARING : 16.11.2018 12' -0' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.11.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-7, CHENNAI , DATED 31.08.2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2 I.T.A. NO.2760/CHNY/18 S.P. NO.355/CHNY/18 2. TODAY, THE STAY PETITION IS LISTED FOR HEARING. AFTER HEARING THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI Y. SRI DHAR, THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS NOT PASSED A SPEAKI NG ORDER. THEREFORE, THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT(APPEALS) FOR RECONSIDERATION. ACCORDINGLY, BY CONSENT OF BOTH THE PARTIES, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS TAKEN U P FOR HEARING. 3. SHRI Y. SRIDHAR, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) IS EXPECTED TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IRRESPECTIVE OF THE FACT WHETHER THE ASSESSEE APPEARED BEFORE HIM OR NOT. IN THIS CASE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REP RESENTATIVE, THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS NOT PASSED A SPEAKING ORDER ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPEARED BEFORE HIM. THEREFOR E, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESS ING OFFICER IS NOT JUSTIFIED. MOREOVER, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPR ESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSEE HAS TO FILE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THIS CA SE TO SUPPORT THE CLAIM. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, IT IS PROPER FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE-EXAMINE THE SAME RATHER THA N THE CIT(APPEALS). THEREFORE, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE SU BMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSE SSING OFFICER FOR RECONSIDERATION. 3 I.T.A. NO.2760/CHNY/18 S.P. NO.355/CHNY/18 4. WE HEARD SHRI B. SAGADEVAN, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. THE LD. D.R. VERY FAIRLY SUBM ITTED THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS NOT DISPOSED OF THE ASSESSEES APP EAL ON MERIT, THEREFORE, THE MATTER NEEDS TO BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD. D.R. ALSO FAIRLY SUBMIT TED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT HE IS GOING TO FILE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, IT IS NECESSARY FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE-EXAMINE T HE SAME. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS ON EITHER SID E AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) ON T HE GROUND THAT THERE IS NO FURTHER SUBMISSION IN SUPPORT OF T HE STAND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE. IN FACT, AT PARA 4.1 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS), HE OBSERVED AS FOLLOWS:- 4.1 IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY FURTHER SUBMISSION IN SUPP ORT OF ITS STAND BY THE APPELLANT, THE CASE IS FINALISE D ON MERITS. NO INTERFERENCE IN A.O.S ORDER IS CALLED FOR AND T HEREFORE, THE A.O.S ORDER IS CONFIRMED. 6. APART FROM THIS, THERE IS NO DISCUSSION WITH REG ARD TO GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) BEING THE FIRST APPEL LATE AUTHORITY IN 4 I.T.A. NO.2760/CHNY/18 S.P. NO.355/CHNY/18 HIERARCHY AND HAVING POWER CONTERMINOUS WITH THAT O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HE IS EXPECTED TO DISCUSS THE MATTER ON TH E BASIS OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPEARED BEFORE HIM, IT IS FOR THE CIT(APPEALS) TO CALL FOR RECORDS FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND RE-APPRECIATE THE SAME AND DI SPOSE OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BY A SPEAK ING ORDER. UNFORTUNATELY, SUCH AN EXERCISE WAS NOT DONE BY THE CIT(APPEALS). THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS UNABLE TO UPHOLD THE OR DER OF THE CIT(APPEALS). SINCE THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS BEFORE THI S TRIBUNAL THAT HE IS GOING TO FILE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, AS RIGHTLY SUBMITTED BY THE LD. D.R. AND THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE, T HE ASSESSING OFFICER BEING THE ORIGINAL AUTHORITY IS THE RIGHT P ERSON TO CONSIDER THE SAME AT FIRST INSTANCE. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSU E RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESS ING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE-EXAMINE THE SAME IN THE LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL THAT MAY BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THER EAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5 I.T.A. NO.2760/CHNY/18 S.P. NO.355/CHNY/18 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. HOWEVER, THE STAY PETITION I S DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON16 TH NOVEMBER, 2018AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( . . . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 16 TH NOVEMBER, 2018. KRI. - )056 76'0 /COPY TO: 1. +,/ APPELLANT 2. )*+,/ RESPONDENT 3. / 80 () /CIT(A)-7, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT- 2, CHENNAI 5. 69 )0 /DR 6. :& ; /GF.