SHRI A. MOHAMED ZIAVUDDIN, CHENNAI V. ITO NON -CORPORATE WARD -11(2), CHENNAI

ITA 954/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 103 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9968 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 18-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 24-11-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी वी दुगाŊ राव Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जी. मंजुनाथा, लेखा सद˟ के समƗ Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.953 & 954/Chny/2020 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2012-13 Shri A. Mohamed Ziavuddin, Old No. 8, New No. 6/34, Venkata Iyer Street, Muthialpet, George Town, Chennai 600 001. [PAN:AAAPZ3654R] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 11(2), Chennai (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Y. Sridhar, F.C.A. ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 19.10.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 21.10.2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed against common order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai dated 15.04.2019 relevant to the assessment years 2010-11 and 2012-13. 2. Both the appeals filed by the assessee are time barred by 520 days delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. In the form of an affidavit, the assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay, I.T.A. Nos.953 & 954/Chny/20 2 wherein, it was explained for the delay between the period from 23.06.2019 to 23.03.2020 that the delay was due to ill health with heart related illness, old age related issues and further due to my previous AR relative health issues duly supported by various medical reports. It was also stated that filing of the appeal was further delayed due to outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic and nationwide lockdown from 24.03.2020 onwards. We have gone through the medical report and find from the Pulmonology – OP record that the assessee was admitted in the Madras Medical Mission in November, 2018 for heart treatment and have been under periodical medical check-up besides underwent cataract IOL implantation. Considering the old age and heart treatment/post operative treatments, we hereby condone the delay in filing the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication subject to the condition that the assessee should pay ₹.5,000/- for each assessment year to the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court and produce necessary proof of payment of cost before the ld. CIT(A). 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 13.08.2016 for the assessment year 2010-11 admitting I.T.A. Nos.953 & 954/Chny/20 3 income of ₹.3,34,250/-. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961[“Act” in short] dated 30.12.2017 by assessing total income at ₹.66,58,980/-. Similarly, the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 on 17.08.2016 admitting total income at ₹.5,39,130/- and the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 30.12.2017 determining total taxable income at ₹.23,05,270/-. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellate authority and the ld. CIT(A) dismissed both the appeals. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal for both the assessment years and challenged the exparte order passed by the ld. CIT(A), wherein, legal issue has been raised in both the appeals. 5. The ld. DR has submitted that sufficient opportunities were afforded to the assessee to represent his case before the ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard both the sides, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. On perusal I.T.A. Nos.953 & 954/Chny/20 4 of the appellate order, we find that the ld.CIT(A) posted the cases for hearing on several occasions right from 26.11.2018 onwards. Since there was no representation or put appearance before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) has concluded the appellate order by upholding the assessment order and dismissed both the appeals filed by the assessee. On perusal of the medical records brought on record before the Tribunal, we find from the Pulmonology – OP record that the assessee was admitted in the Madras Medical Mission in November, 2018 for heart treatment and have been under periodical medical check-up and thereby, the assessee could not put his appearance before the ld. CIT(A) or filed written submissions. In view of the facts and circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee should be given one more opportunity to substantiate his case before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the exparte order passed by the ld. CIT(A) for both the assessment years and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the issues raised by the assessee in accordance with law by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee subject to production of evidence towards payment of cost imposed hereinabove. The I.T.A. Nos.953 & 954/Chny/20 5 assessee is also directed to furnish details/explanations before the ld. CIT(A) for consideration. 7. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 21 st October, 2022 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (G. MANJUNATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 21.10.2022 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ (अपील)/CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 6. गाडŊ फाईल/GF.