GANESAN (HUF), NAMAKKAL V. ITO , WARD 2 , TIRUCHENGODE

ITA 571/CHNY/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1262 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 10-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 10-07-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Set aside

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ ᭠यायपीठ,चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी महावीर ͧसंह, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी मनोज क ु मार अĒवाल, लेखा सदèय के सम¢ BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.: 571/CHNY/2022 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Ganesan (HUF), 1, Anangur, K. Ayyampalayam, Namakkal District – 637 213. PAN: AAGHG 9168M vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Tiruchengode. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT स ु नवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 11.10.2022 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 11.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeals by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A), Salem/10751/2019-20 dated 11.05.2022. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Tiruchengode for the assessment year 2017-18 u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) vide order of dated 31.12.2019. 2 ITA No.571/Chny/2022 2. The first issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) dismissing the appeal in violation of principles of natural justice without affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee and passing ex-parte order. For this assessee has raised following Ground Nos.2 to 4:- 2. The CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal without affording adequate opportunity to the assessee and hence is in violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. The CIT(A) ought to have seen that the assessee was an agriculturist living in a semi-rural area of Namakkal District and dementia problem, he failed to inform the auditor to represent in the hearings and hence there was insufficient opportunity to the assessee. 4. The CIT(A) also ought to have seen that with restricted access to modern technology in the place of residence, the assessee could not represent in the hearing on the limited opportunity made available to him and hence merely confirming the order of officer was unjustified and unsustainable on the facts of the case. 3. We have heard rival contentions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We noted that the CIT(A) passed the assessment order ex-parte and there is no adjudication at all on the issues. We have gone through the findings of CIT(A) and noticed that the issue before CIT(A) in the grounds of appeal was assessability of cash deposit of Rs.10,73,000/- during demonetization period. But the CIT(A) has not at all discussed this issue. Hence, we set aside the order of CIT(A) and direct him to 3 ITA No.571/Chny/2022 allow reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and also pass a speaking order on merits. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 11 th October, 2022 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनोज कुमार अᮕवाल) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखा सद᭭य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (महावीर ᳲसह ) (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा᭟यᭃ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 11 th October, 2022 RSR आदेशकᳱᮧितिलिपअᮕेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुᲦ (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयुᲦ /CIT 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध/DR 6. गाडᭅ फाईल/GF.