Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.22 seconds)Section 11 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Tin Box Company vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 27 February, 2001
reconciliation etc., vide notice dated 20.03.2015 and the assessee duly
filed reply on 25.03.2015 and the AO rejected the explanation given by
the assessee and framed hurriedly the assessment on 30.03.2015.
According to the Ld.AR, it can be seen that the assessee didn't get proper
opportunity before the AO. In such circumstances, he pleaded that the
assessee may be given proper opportunity before the AO so that relevant
documents can be filed before him. Having gone through the Assessment
Order and the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) we find that the impugned
order of the Ld.CIT(A) is an ex parte order and the AO has also passed
the order hurriedly on 20.03.2015 before the time barring date after
calling for relevant documents. It is noted that the assessee is a
charitable society imparting education in the district of Cuddalore and
claimed exemption u/s.11 of the Act. According to the Ld.AR, the AO has
not considered the relevant evidences filed by the assessee and arbitrarily
made additions in a hurried manner. According to us, it was incumbent
upon the AO to have given the assessee "right to be heard" which should
have been meaningful, and since, the assessee didn't get proper
opportunity before the AO relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of TIN Box Co. v. CIT reported in [2001] 249 ITR 216
(SC), we set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the
assessment back to the file of the AO for de novo assessment. The
assessee is at liberty to file all relevant documents and written
ITA No.1541/Chny/2024 (AY 2012-13)
St. Marys Matriculation Hr. Secondary School
:: 5 ::
1