SUBRAMANIAN SWAMINATHAN,CHENNAI V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI

ITA 3276/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Subramanian Swaminathan, a salaried employee, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which upheld the denial of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) claimed under sections 90 and 90A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee had filed his return for the Assessment Year 2021-22, declaring an income of Rs.55,73,110 and claimed an FTC of Rs.1,38,138, which was denied by the Central Processing Centre (CPC), leading to an additional tax demand. The CIT(A) upheld the CPC's decision due to lack of sufficient evidence from the assessee. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not provided proper notice of hearing, violating the principles of natural justice, and thus remanded the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 29381 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M. ASWATHY
• Assessee Lawyers: LOGESH
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘‘सी’’ Ɋायपीठ चेɄई मŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ŵी मनोज क ुमार अŤवाल ,लेखा सद˟ एवं माननीय ŵी मनु क ुमार िगįर, Ɋाियक सद˟ क े समƗ। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.3276/Chny/2024 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2021-2022) Subramanian Swaminathan, Flat C, New No.4, Old No.24, Chandrashekar Apartments, 4th Street, Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. [PAN: BKEPS 4414H] Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non Corporate Circle 4(1) Chennai 600 006. (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) अपीलाथȸ कȧ ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Logesh, Advocate Ĥ×यथȸ कȧ ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. M. Aswathy, JCIT सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 24.02.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.03.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member) This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Addl/JCIT (A)-1 Nashik [CIT(A)] Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 23.10.2024 for Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a salaried employee for the AY 2021-22 and had filed its return of income on 28.12.2021 for the AY 2021-22 declaring income of Rs.55,73,110/- and claimed the tax relief i.e; Foreign Tax Credit 2 ITA No.3276 /Chny/2024 (‘FTC’ in short) u/s 90/90A of the Act of Rs.1,38,138/-. However, the CPC while processing the return denied relief of FTC and raised the additional demand of Rs.1,69,380/-. The ld.CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO and noted as under: ‘’8.3 The appellant has challenged the disallowance of tax relief under section 90/90A of Rs.1,38,138/-without submitting sufficient evidences or counter arguments in support of its claims. Mere claiming that the CPC erred in making the additions does not give an edge to the appellant. Further, during appellate proceedings, no response received from the appellant to substantiate its claim in support of grounds of appeal though enough opportunities of being heard were given to it, as tabulated in Para 4 above. Hence, keeping in view all the stated facts and discussions and in the absence of any corroborative evidence or material/submission on records, I find no reason in altering the additions made by the CPC. In view of this, the grounds raised by the appellant are dismissed’. Now assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. Before us, the ld.counsel submitted that the ld.CIT(A) erred in denying the claim of Foreign Tax Credit (‘FTC’) u/s 90/90A of the Act of Rs.1,38,138/-, without properly serving the notice for hearings. 4. The ld. DR relied upon the order of the ld.CIT(A). 5. We have heard the both parties. We are of the considered view that the ld.CIT(A) should have given proper notice of hearing as per section 282 of the Act also. Hence, keeping in mind the principles of natural justice, we grant one more opportunity to the assessee to prosecute his case before the ld.CIT(A). The ld. Counsel, during the course of hearing has assured us that he will get the appeal prosecuted before the ld.CIT(A), if the appeal is set aside and remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Therefore, in the light of aforesaid factual position we deem it fit to set aside this appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) to hear 3 ITA No.3276 /Chny/2024 the appeal afresh on merit. The Ld.CIT(A) who shall proceed for fresh adjudication of appeal after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appeal proceedings as per law. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 25th day of March, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनोज क ुमार अŤवाल) (मनु क ुमार िगįर) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखा सद˟ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (MANU KUMAR GIRI) Ɋाियक सद˟ / JUDICIAL MEMBER चेɄई Chennai: िदनांक Dated :25-03-2025 KV आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत /Copy to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem. 4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध/DR 5. गाडŊफाईल/GF "