SURENDHIRAN UNNITHAN VINODKUMAR,CHENNAI V. .ITO, NCW-10(6), CHENNAI

ITA 2618/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Surendhiran Unnithan Vinodkumar, an individual engaged in business as a Film Producer and Distributor, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The original assessment for the year 2020-21 was conducted by the Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 10(6), Chennai, resulting in significant additions to the assessee's income under various sections of the Income Tax Act, 1961, primarily under section 68 for unexplained financial transactions. The assessee contested the assessment, which was upheld by the CIT(A) despite the assessee's non-appearance. The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment, providing the assessee an opportunity to present evidence and explanations.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472424 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D. KOMALI KRISHNA; IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: K. BALASUBRAMANIAN
• Keywords: Set aside; Unexplained cash credit; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘बी’ Ɋायपीठ चेɄई मŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ (SMC) 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.2618 /Chny/2024 (िनधाŊरणवषŊ / Assessment Year: 2020-2021) Surendhiran Unnithan Vinodkumar Plot No.54, Door No.5/12, 2nd Street, Natesan Nagar, Ramapuram, Chennai 600 089. [PAN: AECPV 4836P] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 10(6) Chennai. (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) अपीलाथȸ कȧ ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri K. Balasubramanian, Advocate Ĥ×यथȸ कȧ ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. D. Komali Krishna, IRS, CIT. सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 17.12.2024 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख /Date of Pronouncement : 19.12.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member) This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067628888 (1) dated 14.08.2024. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 10(6), Chennai for the assessment year 2020-21 u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), vide order dated 20.09.2022. 2 ITA No.2618/Chny/2024 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual deriving income from business as Film Producer and Distributor. For the assessment year 2020-21, he has filed the return of income on 26-03-2021admitting a total income of Rs. 13,15,240/-, The return was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act on 28/09/2021 at returned income. Thereafter, the return was selected for limited scrutiny and notice u/s.143 (2) of the Act issued on 29/06/2021. Assessment was completed by passing an order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 1448 of the I.T. Acton 20/9/2022. While so doing the learned AO has determined the total income at Rs. 46,86,000/- by making the following additions: ‘’i) Addition of Rs.3,62,500/- u/s 68 of the Act for Unexplained Unsecured Loan. II) Addition of Rs.3,08,506/-u/s.68 of the Act for Unexplained creditor. iii) Addition of Rs. 18,00,000/-u/s.68 of the Act for Unexplained Advance Received. iv) Addition of Rs. 8,99,752/-for Expenses treated as incorrect’. Assessee further challenged the order of assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act before the ld.CIT(A) who proceeded ex-parte and confirmed the order of the AO on merits. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us. 3. Before the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the AO has not given sufficient time to file evidence and documents to substantiate his explanation. The ld.DR stated that the assessee is habitual defaulter in appearing before the appellate authority hence no lenient view is to be taken in this case and prayed for dismissal of appeal. 4. Though we concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice and grant another opportunity of hearing to the 3 ITA No.2618/Chny/2024 assessee. We also find that assessee has not represented before the ld.CIT(A) despite notices. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. AO for denovo assessment on merits after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case with all evidence, confirmations and documents, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld. AO shall be at liberty to proceed with the assessment proceedings on merits as per law. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 19th day of December, 2024 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 : 19-12-2024 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 "