VAIRAVAN MUTHURAMAN,CHENNAI V. .ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KARAIKUDI

ITA 2328/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Vairavan Muthuraman against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2014-15. The primary contention was the reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which the assessee argued was based on 'change of opinion' and lacked new material facts. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not addressed the legal issue of reopening the assessment and had not provided a notice of hearing or opportunity to the assessee, leading to the decision to remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 107332 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAMANTHA MULLAMUDI
• Assessee Lawyers: T.VASUDEVAN
• Keywords: Difference of opinion; Change of opinion; Reopening of assessment; TDS
• Section: 147; 37

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी एस.आर. रगुनाथॎ, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2328/Chny/2024 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Vairavan Muthuraman, New No. 45, First Main Road, Shenoy Nagar (West), Chennai. [PAN:ABAPM0217G] Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle, 1, Karaikudi. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Smt. Samantha Mullamudi, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 12.12.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 18.12.2024 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 08.07.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. At the outset, the ld. AR Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate submits that ld. CIT(A) did not give any finding on the legal issue of reopening of assessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in I.T.A. No.2328/Chny/24 2 short] raised by the assessee. He vehemently argued that there was neither any failure on the part of assessee to disclose material facts nor any fresh material had arisen leading to any income escaping assessment, thereby, the reopening of assessment is unsustainable and untenable in law. Further he submits that the issues of house rent allowance claimed under section 37 of the Act, lorry hire charges and TDS on lorry hire charges were examined in the scrutiny proceedings and hence reconsidering the same tantamount to change of opinion. It was further submitted that no reasonable opportunity was afforded by the ld. CIT(A) and prayed that the assessee may be granted one more opportunity to prosecute assessee’s case before the ld. CIT(A). 3. The ld. DR Smt. Samantha Mullamudi, Addl. CIT fairly conceded that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 4. Heard both the parties and perused the material on record. On perusal of the impugned order, we note that before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has raised ground No. 1 to 5 in objecting to reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Act alleging ‘change of opinion’, but, however, the ld. CIT(A) did not adjudicate the legal issue raised by I.T.A. No.2328/Chny/24 3 the assessee. Further we note that there is no mention about any notice of hearing has been issued on the assessee or calling for any details on merits. Under the above facts and circumstances, we deem it fit to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication by affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence in support of his claim. Thus, grounds Nos. 1 to 14 raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 18th December, 2024 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 18.12.2024 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 & I.T.A. No.2328/Chny/24 4 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. "