Ramanathan Balakrishnan Vinoth, Salem V. ITO Ward 2(3), Salem

ITA 946/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7576 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 08-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: T S LAKSHMI VENKATARAMAN C A
• Keywords: Business income; Principle of natural justice; Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C (SMC) BENCH : CHENNAI , , BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./I.T.A. NO.946/CHNY/2019 ! ' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-2015. SHRI. RAMANATHAN BALAKRISHNAN VINOTH, PROP. M/S. R.B. AGENCIES, 278, RANIPET, ATTUR TK. SALEM 636 102. [PAN AFTPV 3303B] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3) SALEM. ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) # $ % / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. T.S.LAKSHMI VENKATARAMAN, C.A. &' # $ % /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, ADDL. CIT. ( ) $ * /DATE OF HEARING : 22-07-2019 +,'! $ * /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23-07-2019 / O R D E R PER INTURI RAMA RAO , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL S)- SALEM (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 31.01.2019 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR (AY) 2014 -2015. ITA NO. 946/CHNY/2019 :- 2 -: 2. THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : 1) THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT CON DONING THE DELAY OF 140 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. IN THE COURSE OF APP ELLATE PROCEEDINGS ON 23/01/2019 THE APPELLANT FILED REASONS REQUESTIN G FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY OF 140 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL AND ALSO DETAILED OUT THE MERITS OF THE CASE IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED ON 23/01/2019. FOR THE REASONS ADDUCED IN THE ABOVE WRITTEN SUBMIS SIONS THE LEARNED CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE CONDONED THE DELAY AND S HOULD HAVE DECIDED THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 2) IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE GROUND AND OTHER SUBMISSION S TO BE MADE AT THE TIME OF APPEAL HEARING THE APPELLANT PRAYS NECE SSARY DIRECTIONS MAY KINDLY BE GIVEN TO CIT(A) TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL AND DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: THE APPELLANT IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE BUSIN ESS OF TRADE IN THE NAME OF M/S. R.B. AGENCIES. THE RETURN OF I NCOME FOR THE AY 2014-15 WAS FILED ON 30.09.2014 DISCLOSING TOTAL I NCOME OF RS.2,26,040/-. AGAINST THE SAID RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3), SA LEM (HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS AO') VIDE ORDER DATED 21.12.2016 PASS ED U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) DECL ARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 6,57,760/-, AFTER DISALLOWING COMMISSION PAYM ENT OF I1,20,606/- AND ESTIMATED BUSINESS INCOME AT 8% ON ASSESSEE S GROSS INCOME. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ABOVE ADDITIONS, AN APPEAL W AS FILED BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WITH A DELAY OF 140 DAYS. HOWEVE R, IT IS CLEAR FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT ASSESSEE NO T FILED ANY PETITION ITA NO. 946/CHNY/2019 :- 3 -: FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT G IVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT TO RECTIFY THE DEFECT DISMISSED THE APPEAL. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE APPELLANT IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US IN THE PRESENT APPEAL. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF TH E LD. CIT(A), IT IS CLEAR THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WITHOUT NOTIFYING THE DEF ECT IN APPEAL HAD DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINE, WHICH IN OUR CONSID ERED OPINION IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THEREFOR E, WE REMIT THIS APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJ UDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE APPEAL AFTER AFFORDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF HE ARING TO THE APPELLANT. WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL ARE LEFT OPEN BEFORE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX (APPEALS). 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 23RD DAY OF JULY, 2019, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER -) / CHENNAI . / DATED:23RD JULY, 2019. KV /0 $0& *12032'* / COPY TO: 0 1 . # / APPELLANT 3. 0 ( 4*056 / CIT(A) 5. 278 0& * 9 / DR 2. &' # / RESPONDENT 4. 0 ( 4* / CIT 6. 8:0;) / GF