आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ’सी’ ायपीठ चे ई म । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ी महावीर िसंह, उपा एवं माननीय ी मनोज कु मार अ%वाल ,लेखा सद( के सम । BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 417/Chny/2020 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Shri. Kailash Chowdhry No.11, 7 th Trust Cross Street, Mandavelipakkam, Chennai – 600 028. बनाम/ V s. Income Tax Officer Non-Corporate Ward -1(4), Chennai. थायी लेखा सं. /जीआइ आर सं. /P A N/ G I R No . AJPPK -9124 -R (अ पीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ की ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri. D. Anand (Advocate)-Ld. AR थ की ओरसे/Respondent by : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT)-Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of Hearing : 22-12-2021 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 07-01-2022 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chennai [CIT(A)] dated 16-12-2019 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.144 of the Act on 30-06-2016. One of the grounds raised by the assessee is that Ld. CIT(A) did not provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. ITA No: 417/Chny/2020 2 2. The Ld. AR, at the outset, pleaded for another opportunity of hearing by submitting that the assessment was framed on best judgment basis u/s 144 and effective representation could not be made even during appellate proceedings. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, submitted that the assessee remained negligent in attending proceedings before lower authorities. Having heard rival submissions and after considering the orders of lower authorities, our adjudication would be as given in succeeding paragraphs. 3. The material facts are that during assessment proceedings, it transpired that the assessee had deposited cash in various bank accounts. Accordingly, the assessee was directed to establish the source of these deposits. However, in the absence of any reply forthcoming from the assessee, these deposits were added to the income and the expenditure claimed by the assessee was disallowed. During appellate proceedings, the assessee filed written submissions which were subjected to remand proceedings. The findings rendered by Ld. AO in the remand report remained un-responded to by the assessee which resulted into confirmation of assessment order. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. Though we concur with the submissions of Ld. DR that the assessee has remained negligent in attending assessment as well as appellate proceedings, however, keeping in view the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to provide another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its case. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal stand restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication by way of speaking order with a direction to the ITA No: 417/Chny/2020 3 assessee to substantiate his stand failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appeal on the basis of material on record. 5. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 07 th January, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (Mahavir Singh) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) उपा*+ / Vice President लेखा सद- / Accountant Member चे/ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 07/01/2022 JPV JPVJPV JPV आदेशकीAितिलिपअ%ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. थ / The Respondent 3. आयकरआयु7(अपील) / The CIT(A) 4. आयकरआयु7/ CIT– concerned 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, चे/ई / DR, ITAT, Chennai 6. गाड<फाईल / Guard File आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, चे/ई / ITAT, Chennai