BEST MEDICALS , TIRUPUR V. ITO , NFAC , DELHI, DELHI

ITA 857/CHNY/2022

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Best Medicals, the appellant, contesting an ex-parte order from the Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the addition of Rs. 12,37,100 as a cash deposit during the demonetization period under section 69 read with section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) also passed an ex-parte order, not considering additional evidence provided by the assessee. The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to furnish adequate evidence and the lack of an audit of accounts, but decided to remand the case back to the AO for a fair hearing, subject to the payment of costs.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 135057 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 20-10-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ ᭠यायपीठ,चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI ᮰ी महावीर ᳲसह, उपा᭟यᭃ एवं ᮰ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद᭭य के समᭃ BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 857/CHNY/2022 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Best Medicals, 2 nd Main Road, Tippu Corner, Kankeyam, Tirupur – 638 701. PAN: AAOFB 5760C vs. The Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 09.01.2023 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 09.01.2023 आदेश /O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2016-17/10059493 dated 14.09.2022. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Center, Delhi for the assessment year 2 ITA No. 857/Chny/2022 2017-18 u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), vide order dated 20.09.2021. 2. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to the order of CIT(A) deciding the issue ex-parte and without considering the additional evidence filed before him and the order of AO is also ex-parte passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s.144B of the Act confirming the addition of Rs.12,37,100/- being cash deposit added u/s.69 r.w.s.115BBE of the Act. 3. At the outset the ld.counsel for the assessee stated that only issue on merits is cash deposit during demonetization period of Rs.12,37,100/- added u/s.69 of the Act and also charging higher rate of tax u/s.115BBE of the Act. The ld.counsel stated that the assessee despite receipt of many notices could not furnish any evidence before the AO and the AO passed ex-parte order in the absence of appearance by assessee and therefore added the entire cash deposit of Rs.12,37,100/-. But CIT(A) has not admitted the additional evidences in the shape of cash book, VAT return of one quarter and other documents. We noted that even before CIT(A), assessee could not file any reasons for admissibility of additional evidence. It is noticed from the order of CIT(A) that the assessee 3 ITA No. 857/Chny/2022 has admitted total receipts which appears to be more than Rs.1 crore but the assessee failed to get its accounts audited and even partnership deed was not given to the CIT(A). The ld.counsel stated that there is a fault on the part of the assessee but in the interest of substantial justice, assessee being a small trader of medicine and pharmaceuticals, the matter may be remanded back to the file of AO. The ld.counsel undertook to file all the details before the AO at the first instance. 4. When this was pointed out to ld.Senior DR, he contested setting aside the order of CIT(A) and that of the AO and remand the matter back to the file of the AO because the AO has provided many opportunities of being heard to the assessee and even CIT(A) has allowed many opportunities as is clearly evident from the orders. 5. After hearing both the sides and going through the facts in entirety, we are of the view that in the interest of substantial justice, the assessee should be given one more opportunity to present its case before the AO but subject to cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras on or before 31.03.2023. The assessee will 4 ITA No. 857/Chny/2022 pay this cost and produce the receipt before the AO. In term of the above, the matter is restored back to the file of the AO. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 9 th January, 2023 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (जी. मंजुनाथ) (G. MANJUNATHA) लेखा सद᭭य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (महावीर ᳲसह ) (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा᭟यᭃ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 9 th January, 2023 RSR आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुᲦ (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकरआयुᲦ /CIT 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध/DR 6. गाडᭅ फाईल/GF.