P.Ganesan, CHENNAI V. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITSSA 6/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0473 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-12-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 29-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P RADHAKRISHNAN
• Assessee Lawyers: T VASUDEVAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A B ENCH, CHENNAI . , ! # $ , % & BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./I.T(SS)A.NO. 6/MDS/2014 ( BLOCK YEAR : 01.04.1996 TO 10.07.2002 ) SHRI P.GANESAN, 84, BARACCA ROAD I STREET NAMMALWARPET, CHENNAI-600 012. VS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II(3), CHENNAI-600 034. PAN: AHDPG1895P ( ! /APPELLANT) ( '#! /RESPONDENT) ! $ / APPELLANT BY : MR. T.VASUDEVAN, ADVOCATE '#! $ /RESPONDENT BY : MR .P.RADHAKRISHNAN, JCIT $ , / DATE OF HEARING : 16 TH DECEMBER, 2014 $ , /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 TH DECEMBER, 2014 / O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)(C)-II, CHENNAI DATED 31.01.2014 . THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUNDS IN ITS APPEAL AND ONE OF SUCH GROUN DS IS THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN NOT GIVING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE BEFOR E CONCLUDING THE PROCEEDINGS. 2. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT IMPUGNED ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 2 IT(SS)A NO.6/MDS/2014 (APPEALS) EX-PARTE DISMISSING THE APPEAL. COUNSEL S UBMITS THAT ASSESSEE COULD NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR UNAVOIDABLE REASONS. THERE FORE HE SUBMITS THAT ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE GIVEN ONE MOR E OPPORTUNITY TO REPRESENT HIS CASE BEFORE HIM. 3. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAS NO SERIOUS OBJECTION IN REMITTING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) TO DECIDE IT A FRESH. 4. HEARD BOTH SIDES. PERUSED ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHOR ITIES. ON GOING THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS), WE FIND THAT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS PROVIDED FOUR OPPORTUNITIES TO THE AS SESSEE. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). IT WAS THE SUBMISSION OF TH E ASSESSEE THAT DUE TO UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRESENT BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NOR ENGAGED COUNSEL TO REPRESE NT HIS CASE. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE FEEL THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SHOULD HAVE GI VEN 3 IT(SS)A NO.6/MDS/2014 ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO DECIDE THE APPEAL. THUS, WE REMIT THE APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR CONSIDERIN G THE APPEAL AFRESH, AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON FRIDAY, THE 19 TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( 7 9: ' ) ( A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ( CHALLA NAGENDR A PRASAD ) < / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 9= < / JUDICIAL MEMBER 9 /CHENNAI, ? /DATED, 19 TH DECEMBER, 2014 SOMU $ '=AB CB /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. D () /CIT(A) 4. D /CIT 5. B '==G /DR 6. J /GF .