VETABAYAN PALANI,DHARMAPURI V. ITO, WARD-1, DHARMAPURI

ITA 2242/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Vetabayan Palani against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi, which confirmed an assessment order under sections 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessment was based on a 'Best Judgement Assessment' due to non-compliance by the assessee with various notices. The Tribunal noted a delay of 337 days in filing the appeal, which was attributed to the assessee's medical issues and lack of awareness of the notices, leading to an ex parte order. The Tribunal found the delay justifiable and proceeded to condone it, emphasizing the importance of providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 46658 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 23-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 26-08-2024
• Other Referred Cases: TIN box 249 ITR 216
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHINTHAPALLI MEHER CHAND
• Assessee Lawyers: KATHIR
• Keywords: Set aside; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 144; 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ’डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिर्क सदस्य एवं श्री अयिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 2242 /Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2012-13 Vetabayan Palani, No.4/216, Solakottai Village, Nayakkanahalli Post, Dharmapuri, Tamil Nadu-636002. [PAN: BRWPP7347D] The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Dharmapuri (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Kathir, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Respondent by : Shri Chinthapalli Meher Chand, JCIT सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 23.10.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 08.11.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : This appeal is filed against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1054608818(1) dated 26.07.2023 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2012- 13. Through the aforesaid appeal the assesse has challenged order u/s 250 dated 26.07.2023 passed by NFAC, Delhi. ITA No. 2242 /Chny/2024 :- 2 -: 2.0 It has been noted that there is a delay of 337 days in the case, in filing of this appeal before the tribunal. In its affidavit the assesse has pleaded that he was having some medical issues and was not aware of the notices issued by the First Appellate Authority resulting in ex parte order passed u/s 250. The assessees Chartered accountants advised him to file before this tribunal. All these activities contributed to the delay which was neither willful nor wanton. We have considered the justification put forth by the assesse and we are satisfied with their adequacy. We are also conscious of the fact that no litigant gains by intentionally delaying its own matters. The Ld. DR did not posed any serious objections. Accordingly, we hereby condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate this appeal. 3.0 At the outset the Ld. Counsel for the assesse informed that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has passed an ex-parte order thereby confirming the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 dated 02.12.2019 and that the appeal was dismissed on account of non-appearance. As per the assessment order the assesse had deposited cash of Rs.20,50,000/- in his bank account and no return of income was filed. The Ld. AO noted non-compliance by the assesse to the notices u/s 148, 129, 142(1) and proceeded to complete the assessment on “Best judgement assessment” basis u/s 144 by making the addition of ITA No. 2242 /Chny/2024 :- 3 -: impugned amount. The Ld. CIT(A) however chose to dismiss the appeal on the premise on non-appearance. The Ld. Counsel for the assesse pleaded that the assesse has been denied reasonable opportunity of being heard. It was accordingly prayed that matter may be considered for restoration to Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. Counsel for the assesse assured that full compliance would be made now. The Ld. DR proposed that cost may be levied upon the assesse. 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 prosecute its case. We have also noted that apart from merely harping on the issue of non-appearance by the assesse the Ld. CIT(A) has not touched upon merits of the case. We have also noted that the Ld. AO in his order also clearly indicated that complete details were not forthcoming from the assesse. As a result of which he had to resort to ex-parte assessment. We are therefore of the view that ends of justice would be met if the assessee is given one last opportunity to present its case and file supporting evidences. Accordingly, we set aside the order of authorities below. The assessing officer is the primary authority to determine taxable income of a tax payer by collecting and colleting evidences. Accordingly, placing reliance upon the decision ITA No. 2242 /Chny/2024 :- 4 -: in the case of TIN box 249 ITR 216 the matter is restored to the file of the AO for assessment de novo. He is directed to give due opportunities of being heard to the assesse. The assesse is directed to make complete and correct compliance towards the notices issued by the AO. Any non- compliance from the assesse side shall be adversely viewed. Accordingly, the grounds appeal raised by the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes. 5.0 In the result, the appeal raised by the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 8th, November-2024 at Chennai. Sd/- ( एबी टी. वकी) (ABY T VARKEY) न्यानयक सदस्य / Judicial Member Sd/- (अयिताभ शुक्ला) (AMITABH SHUKLA) लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, नदिांक/Dated: 8th , November-2024. KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Salem 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF "