Karthikesan, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 625/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9235 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 17-03-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH J
• Assessee Lawyers: LAKSHMICHAND NAHATAC A
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI , ! ' . #$ % &' BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NOS.623 TO 629/MDS./2016 / ASSESSMENT YEARS :2005-06 TO 2011-12 SHRI KARTHIKESAN , NO.1174,KEVAR NAGAR, TVS COLONY,ANNA NAGAR WEST, CHENNAI 600 050. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD-XIII-3, CHENNAI. [PAN AFYPK 9601 G ] ( () / APPELLANT) ( *+() /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR.LAKSHMICHAND NAHATA,C.A /RESPONDENT BY : MR.A.V.SREEKANTH,JCIT,DR / DATE OF HEARING : 24 - 05 - 201 6 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25 - 05 - 2016 , / O R D E R PER BENCH ALL THESE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AG AINST THE DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-7, CHENNAI DATED 11.01.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EARS 2005-06 TO 2011-12. ITA NO.623 TO 629/MDS./16 :- 2 -: SINCE ISSUES INVOLVED IN ALL THESE APPEALS ARE COM MON IN NATURE ONLY CHANGE IN FIGURES PERTAINING TO THE ADDITIONS, ALL THESE APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE CLUBBED TOGETHER, HEARD TOG ETHER, DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF C ONVENIENCE. 2. THE MAIN GROUND IS WITH REGARD TO NON GIVING OF SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE C IT(A). THE ASSESSEE ALSO RAISED THE GROUNDS REGARDING ADDITION S MADE BY THE AO, SUSTAINED BY THE CIT(A). 3. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THERE WAS A SEAR CH IN THE PREMISES OF SHRI MURALIDHARAN AND SHRI P.S.ANNAMALA I. DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, CERTAIN DOCUMENTS WERE FOUND, CON SEQUENT TO THIS NOTICE U/S.153C WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE VARIOUS ADDITIONS WERE MADE TOWARDS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AND UNEXP LAINED INVESTMENTS IN ALL THESE SEVEN ASSESSMENT YEARS. A GGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). O N APPEAL, THE CIT(A) FIXED THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 15.10.2015 AT 10 A.M. ON 15.10.2015, THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE BY THE ASSESSEE . HOWEVER, A LETTER DATED 30.10.2015 WAS FILED SEEKING A TIME OF 15 DAYS TO SUBMIT THE DETAILS CALLED FOR. THE REQUEST WAS ACCEDED TO AND THE APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED TO 17.11.2015. THERE WAS NO COMPLIANCE O N 17.11.2015 DESPITE THE ADJOURNMENT GIVEN AS PER THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE. ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FIXI NG THE HEARING ON ITA NO.623 TO 629/MDS./16 :- 3 -: 30.11.2015. IT WAS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN THE LETTER THAT THIS WAS THE FINAL OPPORTUNITY BEING ACCORDED TO THE ASSESSEE TO COMPLY. IT WAS ALSO MENTIONED CATEGORICALLY THAT ATTENDANCE WAS NO T NECESSARY SHOULD THE ASSESSEE CHOOSE TO FURNISH A WRITTEN SUBMISSION IN SUPPORT OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. AGAIN, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COM PLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE NOTICE. CIT(A) NOTED IN HIS ORDER THAT THE O FFICE SUPERINTENDENT OF THIS OFFICE CONTACTED THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTAT IVE OF ASSESSEE TELEPHONICALLY AND YET ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVE N TO THE ASSESSEE BY FIXING THE HEARING ON 07.01.2016. YET AGAIN, TH E ASSESSEE CHOSE NOT TO AVAIL THE OPPORTUNITY AND DID NOT COMPLY. AC CORDINGLY, THE CIT(A) DECIDED THE ISSUE ON THE BASIS OF THE DOCUME NTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND TO CONFIRM ALL THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO. AGAINST THIS, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE MAIN GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT DUE TO THE REASONS BEYOND ASSESSEES CONTROL, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ABLE TO PLACE NECESSARY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) TO SUPPORT THE ASSESS EES CASE. LD.A.R PLEADED THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO T HE ASSESSEE TO PUT FORTH ASSESSEES CASE, FOR WHICH DEPARTMENTAL R EPRESENTATIVE HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTIONS. CONSIDERING THE FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE INCLINED TO REMIT THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO GIVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO T HE ASSESSEE TO PUT ITA NO.623 TO 629/MDS./16 :- 4 -: ASSESSEES CASE BEFORE HIM. IF THE ASSESSEE FAILS TO CO-OPERATE WITH THE DEPARTMENT, LD.CIT(A) IS AT LIBERTY TO DECIDE T HE ISSUE ON THE BASIS OF RECORDS AVAILABLE WITH HIM. WITH THIS OBSERVATI ON, THE ISSUE IS REMITTED TO THE FILE OF LD.CIT(A) FOR FRESH CONSIDE RATION. 5. AT THIS STAGE, WE REFRAIN FROM GOING INTO OTHER GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS. 6. .IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH MAY, 2016, AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ! ' # . $ %& ' ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) ) % / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER () / CHENNAI *+ / DATED: 25 TH MAY, 2016 K S SUNDARAM +,-- ./-0/ / COPY TO: - 1 . / APPELLANT 4. - 1 / CIT 2. / RESPONDENT 5. /23- 4 / DR 3. - 1-!' / CIT(A) 6. 3&-5 / GF