Shri R.Mohan, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 988/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 64617 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 10-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 07-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR S MOHARANA
• Assessee Lawyers: J PRABHAKAR
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O. K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ------- ITA NO. 988/MDS/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 SHRI R. MOHAN, NO. 26/41, I STREET, PARAMESWARI NAGAR, ADYAR, CHENNAI-600 020. V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD-IV(2), CHENNAI. (PAN : AJCPM7995F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SRI J. PRABHAKAR, CA RESPONDENT BY : DR. S. MOHARANA, CIT DATE OF HEARING : 10-12-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10-12-201 2 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF TH E COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-VIII, CHENNAI DATED 11-01-2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THERE IS A DELAY OF 6 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN ITA NO.988/MDS /2012 : 2 : AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE DELAY. WE FIND THAT THE D ELAY OF 6 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WAS NEITHE R INTENTIONAL NOR WANTON. THE DELAY WAS DUE TO REASONS BEYOND TH E CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE. WE THEREFORE CONDONE THE DELAY. 2. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED HIS R ETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 DECLARING TO TAL INCOME OF ` 1,68,780/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY THROUGH CASS AND ACCORDINGLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD MADE TWO ADDITIONS IN THE ASSESSMENT MADE EX PARTE UNDER SECTION 144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT' FOR SHOR T), I.E. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENSES ON ESTIMATE BASIS A T ` 5,98,496/- AND DEPOSIT MADE TO THE TUNE OF ` 16,64,685/- IN KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. 3. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR . THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS GIVEN SEVERAL DATES AND IN SPITE OF THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS). THEREFORE, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRMED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ITA NO.988/MDS /2012 : 3 : 4. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BE FORE US. AT THE TIME OF HEARING IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ONE MO RE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO DEFEND HIS CASE. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PREPARED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSE SSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT(APPEALS). 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE RECORD S AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE FIND THAT THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS GIVEN AMPLE OPPOR TUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFO RE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS). TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION TH E FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTI CE, WE FIND THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE AS SESSEE TO MEET ENDS OF JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE TH E ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) AND DIRECT THE A SSESSING OFFICER TO PASS FRESH ASSESSMENT DE NOVO AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEA RD. WE ALSO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO APPEAR BEFORE THE ASSES SING OFFICER WITH ALL THE DETAILS. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO.988/MDS /2012 : 4 : 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON MONDAY, THE 10 TH OF DECEMBER, 2012, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O. K. NARAYANAN) (V.DURGA RAO) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 10 TH DECEMBER, 2012. H. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT(A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE