SMT. T.K. RAJALAKSHMI, CHENNAI V. DCIT, NCC-2, CHENNAI

ITA 569/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7805 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 17-03-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, ‘सी’ यायपीठ, चे नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI ी वी . द ु गा राव, या यक सद य एवं ी जी . मंज ु नाथ, लेखा सद य के सम% BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I . T. A. No. 3 3 7 9 / Ch n y/ 2 0 1 9 ( नधा रणवष / A s s e ss m en t Yea r : 2 01 3 - 14 ) Mr. T.K.Krishnaswamy, C/o.M/s.S.Sivaraman,Advocates 4/9, Brindhavan Towers, Block-1 4 th floor, Ashok Pillar Road, K.K.Nagar,Chennai-600 078. V s Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward-1(4) Chennai. PA N: AH S PK 3 7 8 3 H (अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./I . T. A. N o. 3 3 8 0 / Ch ny / 2 0 1 9 & 5 6 9/ C hn y/ 2 0 2 0 ( नधा रणवष / A s s e ss m en t Yea r : 2 01 3 - 14 ) Mrs.T.K. Rajalakshmi C/o.M/s.S.Sivaraman,Advocates 4/9, Brindhavan Towers, Block-1 4 th floor, Ashok Pillar Road, K.K.Nagar,Chennai-600 078. V s Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Circle-2 Chennai. PA N: AD Q P R 6 8 7 5 H (अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) अपीलाथ क ओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr. Philip George, Advocate यथ क ओरसे/Respondent by : Mr. P.Sajit Kumar, JCIT स ु नवाईक तार ख/D a t e o f h e a r i n g : 11.07.2022 घोषणाक तार ख /D a t e o f P r o n o u n c e m e n t : 13.07.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER G. MANJUNATHA, AM: These three appeals filed by different assessees are directed against common order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Chennai, all dated 29.08.2019 and pertain to assessment year 2013-14. Since, facts are identical and issues are common, for the sake of 2 ITA Nos. 3379 & 3380/Chny/2019 & ITA No.569/Chny/2020 convenience, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed off, by this consolidated order. 2. At the time of hearing, learned AR for the assessee submitted that the appeals filed by the assessees are time barred by limitation of 38 days (in ITA No.3379 & 3380/Chny/2019) and 131 days in ITA No.569/Chny/2020 for which necessary petition for condonation of delay along with affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay has been filed. The AR further submitted that the assessee could not file appeals within the time allowed under the Act, due to recurring illness of his mother, who also filed another appeal caused delay of 38 days. The delay in filing appeals is neither intentional nor willful but for the unavoidable reasons, therefore, delay may be condoned in the interest of advancement of substantial justice. 3. The learned DR, on the other hand, strongly opposing condonation of delay petition filed by the assessee submitted that the reasons given by the assessee do not come within the ambit of reasonable and bonafide reasons, which can be considered for condonation of delay. 3 ITA Nos. 3379 & 3380/Chny/2019 & ITA No.569/Chny/2020 4. Having heard both sides and considered the petition filed by the assessee for condonation of delay, we are of the considered view that reasons given by the assessees for not filing the appeals within the time allowed under the Act comes under reasonable cause as provided under the Act for condonation of delay and hence, delay in filing of appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessees are admitted for adjudication. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed return of income for the assessment year 2013-14 declaring total income of Rs.18,26,750/-. The case has been reopened u/s.147 of the Act for the reasons recorded, as per which income chargeable to tax had been escaped assessment and consequently, notice u/s.148 dated 28.06.2016 was issued to the assessee. In response to notice, the assessee has filed return of income. The case has been taken up for scrutiny and assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 16.11.2016 and determined total income at Rs.12,29,73,340/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellate authority, but neither appeared nor 4 ITA Nos. 3379 & 3380/Chny/2019 & ITA No.569/Chny/2020 filed any details, despite ten opportunity of hearing was provided to the assessee, which is evident from para 4 of the learned CIT(A) order. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) left with no choice has disposed off appeal filed by the assessee ex- parte and confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer. 3. We have heard both the sides and considered relevant materials on record. At the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the learned CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order for non-appearance of the assessee, without disposing off the issues involved in appeal on merits, because the assessee could not furnish any evidence to justify his/her case. Therefore, the appeals may be set aside to the file of the learned CIT(A) to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessees. 4. The learned DR, present for the Revenue, on the other hand, supporting order of the learned CIT(A) fairly admitted that the learned CIT(A) has not disposed off the appeals on merits and thus, the Bench may take suitable view to decide the issue in accordance with law. 5 ITA Nos. 3379 & 3380/Chny/2019 & ITA No.569/Chny/2020 5. Having heard both the sides and considered relevant material on record, we find that although, the learned CIT(A) has given number of opportunities to the assessee, but the assessee neither appeared nor filed any details. On many occasions, the assessees have not appeared before the learned CIT(A) and in some occasions although, the assessee has sought adjournments, but finally could not file necessary details in support of his appeal filed against order of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) disposed off appeal filed for non-prosecution. It is well settled principles of law by decisions of various courts that no appeal should be decided unheard the assessee. Even though, the assessee does not appear before the authorities, but appellate authorities are required to dispose off the appeal on merits on the basis of materials available on record. In this case, the learned CIT(A) has disposed off appeal filed by the assessee on technical grounds without considering issues involved on merits. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the issue needs to go back to the file of the learned CIT(A) to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessees. Hence, we set 6 ITA Nos. 3379 & 3380/Chny/2019 & ITA No.569/Chny/2020 aside all three appeals to the file of learned CIT(A) for reconsideration of issues involved in the appeals filed by the assessees on merits, after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessees. Needless to say, the assessee shall appear before the first appellate authority without seeking adjournment. 6. In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 13 th July, 2022 Sd/- Sd/- (वी. द ु गा राव) (जी. मंज ु नाथ) (V. Durga Rao) (G. Manjunatha) "या यक सद%य /Judicial Member लेखा सद%य / Accountant Member चे"नई/Chennai, (दनांक/Dated 13 th July, 2022. DS आदेश क त*ल+प अ,े+षत/Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. आयकर आय ु -त (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आय ु -त/CIT 5. +वभागीय त न1ध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF.