Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Saraswathi L/H Of (Late) M Shanmugam, ... vs Acit Cwentral Circle 3 (A), Chennai on 25 April, 2019
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, 'बी' यायपीठ, चे नई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
'B' BENCH: CHENNAI
ी जॉज माथन, या यक सद!य एवं
ी एस. जयरामन, लेखा सद!य के सम'
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1113, 1114 to 1119/Chny/2018 नधारण वष /Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2009-10 to 2014-15 Smt.Saraswathi, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner-
L/H. of (Late) Shri M. Shanmugam, of Income Tax, 25, Nehru Street, Corporate Circle-3(1), Kamraj Nagar, Chennai-600 034. Redhills, Chennai-600 052. [PAN: AZFPS 9641 F] (अपीलाथ)/Appellant) (*+यथ)/Respondent)
आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1185 to 1191/Chny/2018 नधारण वष /Assessment Years: 2009-10 to 2015-16 The Asst. Commissioner- Vs. Estate of Late Mani-
of Income Tax, Shanmugam rep. -
Corporate Circle-3(1), by his wife and L/H -
Chennai-600 034. Smt.Saraswathi,
25, Nehru Street,
Kamraj Nagar,
Redhills, Chennai-600 052.
[PAN: AZFPS 9641 F]
(अपीलाथ)/Appellant) (*+यथ)/Respondent)
Assessee by : Mr.T.Vasudevan, Adv.
Department by : Mr.B.Sagadevan, JCIT
सुनवाई क- तार ख/Date of Hearing : 25.04.2019
घोषणा क- तार ख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.04.2019
ITA Nos.1113 to 1119/Chny/2018
&
ITA Nos.1185 to 1191/Chny/2018
:- 2 -:
आदे श / O R D E R
PER BENCH:
ITA Nos.1113/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the assessee and ITA
No.1191/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA Nos.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 dated 04.01.2018 for the AY 2015-16. ITA Nos.1114/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the assessee and ITA No.1185/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA Nos.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 dated 04.01.2018 for the AY 2009-10. ITA Nos.1115/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the assessee and ITA No.1186/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA Nos.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 dated 04.01.2018 for the AY 2010-11. ITA Nos.1116/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the assessee and ITA No.1187/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA Nos.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 dated 04.01.2018 for the AY 2011-12. ITA Nos.1117/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the assessee and ITA No.1188/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA Nos.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 dated 04.01.2018 for the AY 2012-13. ITA Nos.1118/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the assessee and ITA ITA Nos.1113 to 1119/Chny/2018 & ITA Nos.1185 to 1191/Chny/2018 :- 3 -:
No.1189/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA Nos.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 dated 04.01.2018 for the AY 2013-14. ITA Nos.1119/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the assessee and ITA No.1190/Chny/2018 is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-19, Chennai, in ITA Nos.71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, & 77/17-18 dated 04.01.2018 for the AY 2014-15. As all these appeals are interconnected, they are being disposed off by this common order.
2. Shri B.Sagadevan, JCIT, represented on behalf of the Revenue and Shri T.Vasudevan, Adv., represented on behalf of the assessee.
3. It was submitted by the Ld.AR that the assessee is an individual who was doing business of running a chit and giving loans. It was a submission that the assessee was giving loans on commission basis. The assessee received commission @3%. It was a submission that there was a search on the premises of the assessee on 17.11.2014 and the search was effectively completed on 30.01.2015. The assessment came to be completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.153B on 30.12.2016, wherein, the AO had made substantial additions by treating the advances which had been given by the assessee on commission basis as unaccounted advances. Similarly, various other additions had also been made representing investments, ITA Nos.1113 to 1119/Chny/2018 & ITA Nos.1185 to 1191/Chny/2018 :- 4 -:
jewellery and in respect of the chit business of the assessee. It was a submission that notice u/s.142(1) was issued for the first time on 29.04.2016, wherein, the return of income was also called for. It was a submission that the assessee had expired in June, 2015. The assessee's Legal Representative Smt. Saraswathi had complied with the search assessments. It was a submission that as the Legal Representative was not aware of the procedure involved, even the copies of search documents had not been collected. It was a submission that consequently, there was no effective representation on behalf of the assessee before the lower authorities. It was a submission that the Legal Representative is not educated enough to understand the implications and complications of the Income Tax Act. It was a prayer that now she is being assisted by competent Counsels. It was a prayer that the issues in all the appeals including the Revenue appeals could be restored to the file of the AO for re-adjudication and the assessee would be able to produce substantial evidences from the seized materials itself as also from the available records with the assessee. It was a prayer that the assessee may be granted an opportunity in the interest of natural justice.
4. In reply, the Ld.DR submitted that the opportunities had been granted to the assessee on various occasions and other than asking further details, the assessee has not given any evidences in the course of the assessment. It was submitted by the Ld.DR that even the Ld.CIT(A) ITA Nos.1113 to 1119/Chny/2018 & ITA Nos.1185 to 1191/Chny/2018 :- 5 -:
has granted substantial relief to the assessee which is also liable to be reversed. It was however, fairly agreed by the Ld.DR that the search documents had not been made available to the assessee as the assessee had not asked for the same.
5. We have considered the rival submissions.
6. Admittedly, the search documents and the evidences found in the course of the search have not been given to the assessee for rebuttal. Clearly, the Assessment Order contains evidences collected out of the searched material and this has not been given to the assessee. This being so, in the interest of natural justice, the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) and that of the AO for all the AYs are set aside and the issues in these appeals are restored to the file of the AO for re-adjudication de novo after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and for furnishing the evidences as required by the assessee for substantiating their claims.
7. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee & the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on the 25th day of April, 2019, in Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/-
(एस जयरामन) (जॉज माथन)
(S. JAYARAMAN) (GEORGE MATHAN)
लेखा सद!य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER या यक सद!य/JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA Nos.1113 to 1119/Chny/2018
&
ITA Nos.1185 to 1191/Chny/2018
:- 6 -:
चे नई/Chennai,
2दनांक/Dated: 25th April, 2019.
TLN
आदे श क- * त3ल4प अ5े4षत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ)/Appellant 4. आयकर आयु6त/CIT
2. *+यथ)/Respondent 5. 4वभागीय * त न ध/DR
3. आयकर आयु6त (अपील)/CIT(A) 6. गाड फाईल/GF