P Vidya, Mayiladuthurai V. ITO, Ward-2, Kumbakonam

ITA 350/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1384 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 13-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R ANITHA
• Assessee Lawyers: N ARJUN RAJ CA MR S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A (SMC) BENCH: CHENNAI , BEFORE SH RI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 350 /CHNY/ 201 9 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 201 2 - 1 3 SMT. M. VIDYA, W/O SHRI P. MURALI, NO.51, SUBRAMANIAPURAM, MAYILADUTHURAI 609 001. [PAN: AOHPV 4251M ] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 2 , NO.1, SEKKANKANNI STREET, GANDHI NAGAR, KUMBAKONAM 612 001. ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR. N. ARJUNRAJ, C.A. FOR MR. S. SRIDHAR , ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : M S . R. ANITH A, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 17 .03.2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 7 .03 .20 20 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 1 , TRICHY IN APPEAL NO.I.T.A. NO.242/2015 - 16/CIT(A) - 1/TRY DATED 01.11.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 2 - 201 3 . ITA NO. 350 / CHNY / 201 9 : - 2 - : 2. MR. N. ARJUNRAJ, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT FOR MR. S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND MS. R. AN ITHA, JCIT REPRE SENTED ON BEHALF OF THE R EVENUE . 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAD SOLD CERTAIN IMMOVABLE PROPERT IES AND HA D INVESTED IN RESIDENTIAL HOUSE AT NEELANGARAI. IT WAS A SUBM ISSION THAT IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ON MULTIPLE GROUNDS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT ON APPEAL, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD NOT ALLOWED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OF DEDUC TION U/S.54F OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAD NOT GRANTED THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE HER CLAIM. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GRANTED ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE HER CLAIM IN RESPECT OF THE DEDUCTION U/S.54F OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). ITA NO. 350 / CHNY / 201 9 : - 3 - : 4. IN REPLY, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSE SSING OFFICER AND THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). 5 . I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 6. IN GROUND NO.5 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT B EEN GRANTED PROPER OPPORTUNITY BEFORE PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SHOWS THAT THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE IN RESPECT OF THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S.54F IS NOT COMING OUT OF THE SAID ORDER . THIS BEING SO, IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL IN RESPECT OF THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S.54F OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR RE - ADJUDICATION AFTER ITA NO. 350 / CHNY / 201 9 : - 4 - : GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE HER CASE. 7 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A. NO. 350 /CHNY/2019 IS PARTLY AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 7 TH MARCH , 20 20 IN CHENNAI. SD/ - ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI, / DATED: 1 7 TH MARCH , 2020 IA, SR. PS / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / CIT(A) 4. / CIT 5. / DR 6. / GF