, , IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI. . , . !' !' !' !' , # # # # $ $ $ $ BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NOS.02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07 AND 08/MDS/2014 # ' %' / ASSESSMENT YEARS:2001-02, 02-03, 03-04, 04-05, 05-0 6, 06-07 & 07-08 SHRI JEPPIAAR, 29A, GANAPATHY STREET, ROYAPETTAH, CHENNAI 600 014. [PAN : AAFPJ3461R] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE I(3) CHENNAI. ( &' &' &' &' / APPELLANT ) ( ()&' ()&' ()&' ()&' / RESPONDENT ) &' * + / APPELLANT BY : SHRI T. BANUSEKAR, C.A. ()&' * + / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB, ADDL. CIT * , / DATE OF HEARING : 30.04.2014 -% * , /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.04.2014 O R D E R PER BENCH : THIS BATCH OF SEVEN PENALTY APPEALS ARE FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) I, C HENNAI DATED 29.10.2013 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005- 06, 2006-07 AND 2007-08. 2. WHEN THE APPEALS WERE TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI T. BANUSEKAR, C.A. APPEARED AND SUBMI TTED THAT HE WAS THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS ) ALSO AND DUE TO SOME UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES, HE WAS UNABLE TO ATTEND BEFORE THE LD. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO NONO NOS SS S. .. .02 0202 02- -- -08 0808 08/MDS/1 /MDS/1 /MDS/1 /MDS/14 44 4 2 CIT(APPEALS) AND SOME OF THE RELEVANT MATERIALS, WH ICH ARE NECESSARY TO DECIDE THE ISSUE UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE INC OME TAX ACT WERE ALSO NOT FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). HE, FURTHER SUBM ITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS INVOKED SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT SOME INCRIMINATING MATERIALS HAVE BEEN FOUND DURING THE SOURCE OF SEARCH AND SUBSEQUENT TO THE SEARCH, THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED RE TURN OF INCOME, WHICH IS MUCH HIGHER THAN THE INCOME DISCLOSED IN THE ORIGIN AL RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS CONTEXT, IT IS NECESSARY TO BE SE EN EXPLANATION 5 TO SECTION 271(1) AND RELEVANT MATERIALS ALSO NECESSARILY REQU IRED TO BE EXAMINED. HE, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE AFFORDED OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE FOR PRESENTING THE CASE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR FAIRLY ACCEPTED T HAT EXPLANATION 5 TO SECTION 271(1) APPLIES IN THESE CASES AND HOWEVER, HE SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE FIND TH AT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) IS AN EX-PARTE ORDER FOR ALL THE A SSESSMENT YEARS. SINCE THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS PRAYED FOR ONE MOR E OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE, TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT FIT TO OFFER ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE SINCE T HE LD. DR HAS FAIRLY ACCEPTED THAT EXPLANATION 5 TO SECTION 271(1) APPLI ES TO THE PRESENT CASES OF ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF TH E LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO NONO NOS SS S. .. .02 0202 02- -- -08 0808 08/MDS/1 /MDS/1 /MDS/1 /MDS/14 44 4 3 REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO HIM TO AFFORD ONE MORE OPP ORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE MATTERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FILE ALL RELEVANT DOCUMENTS AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) TO DECIDE THE PENALTY APPEALS FOR ALL THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS. 5. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 30 TH OF APRIL, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V.DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 30.04.2014 VM/- TO: THE ASSESSEE/A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.