Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Acit Non Corporate Circle 10(1), ... vs S.Pannerselvam, Chennai on 6 June, 2019
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, 'ए' यायपीठ, चे नई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
'A' BENCH: CHENNAI
ी जॉज माथन, या यक सद य एवं
ी इंटूर रामा राव, लेखा सद य के सम'
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3357/Chny/2018
नधारण वष /Assessment Year: 2008-09
The Asst. Commissioner of - Vs. Shri S.Paneerselvam,
Income Tax, No.11, Vivek Nagar,
Non-Corporate Circle-10(1), Kolathur, Chennai-600 099.
121, M.G.Road,
Chennai.
[PAN: AINPP 3051 B]
(अपीलाथ)/Appellant) (*+यथ)/Respondent)
Department by : Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT
Assessee by : Mr. K.Balasubramanian, Adv.
सुनवाई क- तार ख/Date of Hearing : 06.06.2019
घोषणा क- तार ख /Date of Pronouncement : 06.06.2019
आदे श / O R D E R
PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Chennai, in ITA No.262/CIT(A)-12/2016-17 dated 31.07.2018 for the AY 2008-09.
2. Mr. AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT, represented on behalf of the Revenue and Mr. K.Balasubramanian, Adv., represented on behalf of the assessee. ITA No.3357/Chny/2018
:- 2 -:
3. It was submitted by the Ld.DR that there was a survey on the premises of the assessee. As a consequence of survey, it was noticed that certain advances had been made by the assessee, for which, explanation had been called for. There was absolute non-cooperation on the part of the assessee in the course of the assessment proceedings. It was a submission that before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee produced certain evidences which have been considered by the Ld.CIT(A) without putting the same to the AO for examination and his rebuttal. It was a submission that the Ld.CIT(A) has also not adjudicated the issues as to why the additional evidences were liable to be admitted. It was a submission that in the interest of natural justice, the issues in this appeal must be restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to follow the proper procedure in admitting the additional evidences and adjudicate the issues afresh.
4. In reply, the Ld.AR submitted that the notice u/s.148 and the hearing notices issued by the AO had not been served on the assessee. It was a submission that this is one of the grounds raised by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A). It was a submission that as the Ld.CIT(A) had adjudicated the issues on merits in favour of the assessee, the Ld.CIT(A) had not adjudicated the issue of re-opening. It was a submission that he had no objection if the issues are restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for re-adjudication.
5. We have considered the rival submissions.
ITA No.3357/Chny/2018
:- 3 -:
6. A perusal of the order of the Ld.CIT(A) clearly shows that he had admitted the additional evidence and had adjudicated the appeal on the basis of such additional evidence without calling for remand report or sending the same for AO's rebuttal. This being so, the order of the Ld.CIT(A) is found to be erroneous and the same is set aside. As the error has taken place at the point of the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for re-adjudication. If he proposes to admit the additional evidence, he has to follow the prescribed procedure. The Ld.CIT(A) should also adjudicate on all the grounds have been raised in the appeal by the assessee.
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on the 06th day of June, 2019 in Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/-
(इंटूर रामा राव) (जॉज माथन)
(INTURI RAMA RAO) (GEORGE MATHAN)
लेखा सद य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER या यक सद य/JUDICIAL MEMBER
चे नई/Chennai,
2दनांक/Dated: 06th June, 2019.
TLN
आदे श क- * त3ल4प अ5े4षत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ)/Appellant 4. आयकर आय6
ु त/CIT
2. *+यथ)/Respondent 5. 4वभागीय * त न ध/DR
3. आयकर आय6
ु त (अपील)/CIT(A) 6. गाड फाईल/GF