Barathi @ Mathivathanam, Pondicherry V. ITO Ward 1, Pondicherry

ITA 790/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9150 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 25-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: CHENNAI . . , . , BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU R.L. REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.790/CHNY/2019 ! ! /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 SMT.BARATHI @ MATHIVATHANAM, MARIA TOWERS, 2 ND FLOOR, 10, VELLAVARAI STREET, MUTHIALPET, PONDICHERRY-605 003. VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, PONDICHERRY. [PAN: AFJPB 3650 D] ( $ /APPELLANT) ( %&$ /RESPONDENT) $ ' / APPELLANT BY : MR.G.BASKAR, ADV. %&$ ' /RESPONDENT BY : MR. GURUBASHYAM, JCIT ' /DATE OF HEARING : 27.06.2019 ' /DT. OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.07.2019 / O R D E R PER SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER O F THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), PUDUCHERRY, IN ITA NO.36/C IT(A)-PDY/2016-17 DATED 19.02.2019 FOR THE AY 2011-12. 2. THE AO RECEIVED INFORMATION THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S PURCHASED A PROPERTY FOR RS.1,35,00000/- ON 30.04.2010. IN ORDE R TO VERIFY THE SOURCES OF INVESTMENTS, HE ISSUED A LETTER TO THE A SSESSEE, FOR WHICH, ITA NO.790/CHNY/2019 :- 2 -: THERE WAS NO RESPONSE. THEREFORE, HE ISSUED A NOTI CE U/S.148 WHICH WAS SERVED ON 06.09.2014. SINCE, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RESPOND, THE AO ON THE BASIS OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTED, COMPLETED T HE ASSESSMENT U/S.144 R.W.S.147. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THAT ORDER, THE ASSES SEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND THE LD.CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE FILED THE APPEAL. 3. THE LD.AR INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO VARIOUS PORTI ONS OF THE PAPER BOOK SUBMITTED THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WENT WRON G IN MAKING THE ASSESSMENT AND THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING TH E ASSESSMENT. THEREFORE, HE PLEADED THAT THE APPEAL MAY BE ALLOWE D. 4. PER CONTRA, THE LD.DR INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO T HE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COMPLY AND COOPERATE BEFORE THE AO AND HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY DETAILS. SINCE THE AS SESSMENT WAS GETTING BARRED BY LIMITATION, THE AO CONDUCTED ENQUIRY, COL LECTED MATERIALS AND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT BASED ON THEM. BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) ALSO THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS AVAILED AS MANY AS 6-7 OPPO RTUNITIES, BUT HAS NEITHER EXPLAINED THE TRANSACTION NOR GIVEN COMMENT S ON THE REMAND REPORT. THEREFORE, THE LD.CIT(A) DECIDED THE APPEA L ON MERITS. THUS, THE LD.DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES . ITA NO.790/CHNY/2019 :- 3 -: 5. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT MATERIALS. IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ABOVE THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY DETAILS BEFORE THE AO. WE FIND FROM THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) THAT HE POSTED THE APPEAL ON VARIOUS DATES, NONE APPEARE D. SINCE THERE WAS NO RESPONSE, THE LD.CIT(A) REMANDED THE PROCEEDINGS WITH THE AO. SINCE THE ASSESSEE MERELY FILED SALE DOCUMENTS, NO PROPER CLARIFICATION OR EXPLANATION WAS OFFERED AND THE LD.AR REITERATED TH E EARLIER SUBMISSIONS WITHOUT GIVING ANY EXPLANATION AND COMMENTS ON THE REMAND REPORT, ETC., THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE AO. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE FACTS AND ASSOC IATED MATTERS ON THESE ISSUES HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY EXAMINED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND HENCE, WE DEEM IT FIT TO REMIT THE IMPUGNED ISSUES BACK TO THE AO FOR A FRESH EXAMINATION. THE ASSESSEE SHALL LAY ALL MATER IAL IN SUPPORT OF ITS CONTENTION BEFORE THE AO AND SHALL COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF AO IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE AO IS FREE TO CONDUCT APPROPRIATE ENQUIRY, AS DEEMED FIT, HOWEVER, HE SHALL FURNISH ADEQUATE O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE MATERIAL, IF ANY, THAT IS TO BE USED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND THEN SHALL PASS A SPEAKING ORDER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THUS, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO.790/CHNY/2019 :- 4 -: 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON JULY 2 ND , 2019, IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . / . . 0 ) (DUVVURU R.L. REDDY) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, 2 /DATED: JULY 02, 2019. TLN ' % 34 54 /COPY TO: 1. $ /APPELLANT 4. 6 /CIT 2. %&$ /RESPONDENT 5. 4 % /DR 3. 6 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. ! /GF