, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI . , . ' #$ , % & BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.283/MDS/2014 % $ ($ / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 SHRI K. PRASANNA RAGHAVENDRAN, NO.40, VOC ROAD, TRICHY 620 001. PAN : AIKPP 7545 H V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE I, TRICHY. (*+/ APPELLANT) (,-*+/ RESPONDENT) *+ . / / APPELLANT BY : SHRI NITHYAESH NATARAJ, ADVOCAT E ,-*+ . / / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N. MADHAVAN, JCIT ' . 0 / DATE OF HEARING : 24.02.2015 1( . 0 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 27.02.2015 / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGA INST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TRICHY, DATED 29.11.2013 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2 I.T.A. NO. 283/MDS/2014 2. FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PROPRI ETOR OF M/S KARVIN INTERIORS DOING INTERIOR DECORATIONS ON CONT RACT BASIS. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED A RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, ON 30.09.2008 BY DECLARING A T OTAL INCOME OF ` 7,45,840/-. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND AFTER DUE PROCESS, THE A.O. HAS COMPLETED THE ASSES SMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHOR T 'THE ACT'). IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE A.O. MADE AN ADDITION OF ` 11,55,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT AND AN ADDITION OF ` 5,01,577/- ON ACCOUNT OF NON-DEDUCTION OF TDS AND AN AMOUNT OF ` 30,11,373/- ON ACCOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. BEFORE THE A.O. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED A NY EVIDENCE. THEREFORE THE A.O. ASSESSED THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT ` 54,13,770/-. 2. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRMED THE O RDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MAT TER BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD.COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE DETAILS ARE AVAILAB LE IN RESPECT OF 3 I.T.A. NO. 283/MDS/2014 THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A.O. HENCE, ONE MORE OPP ORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE SAME BEFORE THE A.O. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D.R. STRONGLY SUPPORT ED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES AND PERUSED THE RECORDS AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ADDITIONS WERE MADE BY THE A.O. AND SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT( APPEALS) ON ACCOUNT OF NON-PRODUCTION OF NECESSARY EVIDENCE BEF ORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE FIND THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO DEFE ND HIS CASE BY PRODUCING ALL THE NECESSARY MATERIALS. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEAL S). WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE ALL THE NECESSARY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE A.O. ON PRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE, THE A.O. IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING DUE OPPO RTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4 I.T.A. NO. 283/MDS/2014 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON FRIDAY, THE 27 TH OF FEBRUARY, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . ' #$ ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (V. DURGA RAO) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER % /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, > /DATED, THE 27 TH FEBRUARY, 2015. KRI. ? . ,%0@A BA(0 /COPY TO: 1. *+ /APPELLANT 2. ,-*+ /RESPONDENT 3. ' C0 () /CIT(A), TIRUCHIRAPPALLI 4. ' C0 /CIT-I, TIRUCHIRAPPALLI 5. A E# ,%0% /DR 6. #$ F /GF.