TACHIL PABLO,BANGALORE V. ITO, NCW-22(6), TAMBARAM

ITA 1086/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Tachil Pablo, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2015-16. The primary contention was the ex-parte addition of Rs.97,94,623/- to the assessee's income, which was alleged to be the unexplained source of property purchase. The assessee argued that the delay in filing the appeal was due to miscommunication with the previous auditor and that the property was purchased through a housing loan from Punjab National Bank, evidence of which was not produced before the AO. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's arguments and decided to remit the matter back to the AO for a detailed examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 652631 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Other Referred Cases: TIN box 249 ITR 216
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANITHA
• Assessee Lawyers: S. SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ’सी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु क ुमार धिरर ,न्याधयक सदस्य एवं माननीय श्री अमिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य क े सिक्ष BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1086/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2015-16 Tachil Pablo, No.A51, 2nd Avenue, Anna Nagar E, Chennai-600 102 [PAN: ALYPP7575Q] Income Tax Officer, Non-Corp Ward-22(6) Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Ms.Anitha, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 17.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 19.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 / 1073349421(1) dated 17.02.2025 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal centre(NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2015-16. The reference to the word “Act” in this order hereinafter shall mean the Income Tax Act, 1961 as amended from time to time. 2.0 At the outset the Ld. Counsel for the assesse informed that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has passed an ex-parte order thereby ITA No.1086/Chny/2025 Page - 2 - of 4 confirming the assessment order u/s 147 r.w. 144 dated 16.03.2023 and that the appeal was dismissed for being filed late without any justified grounds. It was pleaded that the assesse had committed delay of about 9 months and for which it had justified grounds. It was stated that the delay had occurred on account of miscommunication between the appellant under previous auditor. It was argued that even the assessment order was passed by the Ld.AO as ex-parte as the assessee could not comply with the statutory notices within the given time. The Ld. Counsel submitted the matter may be restored to Ld. AO for readjudication on its merits and that it shall make full compliance to the notices of Ld. AO. Personal assurance was given to this effect. The Ld.Counsel also submitted that the addition of Rs.97,94,623/- has been made by the Ld.AO on the premise of non-availability of evidences towards source of purchase of the property. It was stated that the property was sourced through Housing Loan from Punjab National Bank and which admittedly could not be produced before the Ld.AO. In support of its contentions, the Ld. Counsel filed a detailed paperbook. 3.0 Per contra, the Ld.DR relied upon the order of lower authorities. 4.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. It is trite law that no litigant benefits by non- prosecution of its case. We find sufficient force in the pleadings of the assesse as to why it could not file its appeal in time before the Ld.CIT(A). ITA No.1086/Chny/2025 Page - 3 - of 4 We have also noted that apart from merely harping on the issue of delayed filing by the assesse the Ld. CIT(A) has not touched upon merits of the case. We have noted from the letter of the PNB Housing finance at page 111 of the paper book that a loan of Rs.78,35,000/- was sanctioned to the assessee on 28.04.2014 for repayment in 240 months. 5.0 Be that as it may be, we are of the view that the matter of sources of property have not been objectively and comprehensively analyzed by the lower authorities. We are of the view that ends of justice would be met if the assessee is given one last opportunity to present its case and filed supporting evidences before the Ld.AO. The decision to remit it back to the Ld. AO is taken in view of the fact that an Assessing Officer is the fulcrum of assessment proceedings. He possess the first right and responsibilities to examine facts of a case before arriving at his decision qua determination of taxable income in a particular case. Without prejudice it has also been noted that in this case the Ld. AO did not have adequate opportunities to examine the varied facts seminal therein. We have noted with respectful deference the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TIN box 249 ITR 216 on the subject matter. Accordingly, the issue of addition qua sources of property purchased which have been contested by the assessee through its grounds of appeal supra stands remitted back to the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication de novo by passing a speaking order and in accordance with law. To the ITA No.1086/Chny/2025 Page - 4 - of 4 extent the order of lower authorities on this issue stands set aside. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. AO. Any non-compliance on the part of the assesse can be adversely viewed. The assessee is at its liberty to produce the evidences placed before us for consideration of the Ld.AO. The assessee is at liberty to produce all the evidences filed through its paper book before us including any other evidences deemed relevant in support of its claims before the Ld. AO during the readjudication proceedings. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are therefore allowed for statistical purposes. 6.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 19th , June-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- (मनु क ुमार धिरर) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) न्याधयक सदस्य / Judicial Member Sd/- (अधमताभ शुक्ला) (AMITABH SHUKLA) लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 19th , June-2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF "