LAKSHMANA ACHARY RAJENDRA PANDIAN,ARUPPUKOTTAI V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE, MADURAI, MADURAI

SA 63/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Lakshmana Acharya Rajendra Pandian against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2012-13. The assessee initially declared a total income of \\u20b92,03,06,770 but revised it to \\u20b92,08,93,510 following a survey. The Assessing Officer, however, assessed the income at \\u20b96,44,37,835. The CIT(A) confirmed this assessment exparte due to non-response from the assessee. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the request for another opportunity to present the case, decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh assessment on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 107561 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 13-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 24-10-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: N.V. LAKSHMI
• Keywords: Revised return; Application of stay

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी अिमताभ शुƑा, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2710/Chny/2024 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2012-13 & S.P. No. 63/Chny/2024 [In ITA No. 2710/Chny/2024] Lakshmana Acharya Rajendra Pandian, 71, Kasukadai Bazar, Virudhunagar District, Aruppukottai, Tamil Nadu 626 101. [PAN: ABOPR8335C] Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-1, Madurai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 13.11.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 20.11.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.07.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 24 days. Upon hearing both the parties along with reasons raised in the affidavit and I.T.A. No.2710/Chny/24 & S.A. No. 63/Chny/24 2 with the observations of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in assessee’s own case, we condone the delay of 24 days subject to the condition of payment of ₹.10,000/- towards cost in favour of the State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble Madras High Court within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. 3. Coming to the merits of the case, we note that the assessee filed original return of income declaring total income of ₹.2,03,06,770/-. A survey was conducted on the assessee on 01.11.2011 and the assessee filed revised return of income declaring total income of ₹.2,08,93,510/-. Under scrutiny, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment and determined total income of the assessee at ₹.6,44,37,835/- vide his order dated 31.03.2015 passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. As aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). On perusal of the impugned order at para 5.8, we note that the ld. CIT(A) issued 5 notices and there was no response from the assessee in substantiating the grounds raised in Form 35. Having no option, the ld. CIT(A) proceeded to confirm the order of the Assessing Officer exparte of the assessee. I.T.A. No.2710/Chny/24 & S.A. No. 63/Chny/24 3 4. Before us, the ld. AR Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate pleads that one more opportunity may be afforded to the assessee and the assessee is ready with all material evidence to prosecute his case without fail. 5. The ld. DR did not object to the same. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the addition involved therein, in our opinion, it requires assistance from the assessee and therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The ld. CIT(A) shall satisfy on production of receipt of payment of cost imposed hereinabove and proceed to decide the issue on merits and pass order in accordance with law. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. The Stay Application filed by the assessee in S.A. No. 63/Chny/2024, was also heard along with the main appeal. Since we have adjudicated the main appeal by setting aside the CIT(A)’s order and remitted the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. Thus, the stay petition filed by the assessee become infructuous and accordingly, the same stands dismissed. I.T.A. No.2710/Chny/24 & S.A. No. 63/Chny/24 4 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application is dismissed. Order pronounced on 20th November, 2024 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (AMITABH SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 20.11.2024 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. "