ABISHEK KUMAR,VADAPALANI V. ITO, NON CORPORATE, WARD 19(3), NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI

ITA 2700/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Abishek Kumar against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention was regarding the non-payment of tax on a disclosed income of INR 65,50,000 under the Income Declaration Scheme (IDS) 2016, where the assessee only paid tax on 50% of the declared income. The Assessing Officer added the undisclosed income to the assessee's returned income under section 69 read with section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to submit necessary documents and submissions initially but allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the case for further examination of evidence.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 107559 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.ANITA
• Assessee Lawyers: PAWAN CHAKRAPANI
• Section: 148; 142(1); 69; 13

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी अिमताभ शुƑा, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2700/Chny/2024 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Abishek Kumar, #32, Pillaiyar Koil Street, Vadapalani S.O., Vadapalani, Chennai 600 026. [PAN:AAEPA3652L] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 19(3), Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Pawan Chakrapani, CA ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 23.01.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 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 10.09.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The assessee raised 13 grounds in this appeal and mainly challenged the exparte order of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer. I.T.A. No.2761/Chny/24 2 3. Brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and in response to the notice, the assessee filed ITR showing total income of ₹.2,44,490/- after claiming deduction under Chapter VI-A amounting to ₹.1,68,170/-. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had disclosed income amount to ₹.65,50,000/- in IDS 2016 and the tax liability on this income was ₹.29,47,500/-. However, the assessee deposited only 50% of the tax liability amounting to ₹.14,73,752/-. Thus, the assessee paid tax only on 50% of the income i.e., 32,75,000/- disclosed by him in the IDS 2016 and the assessee has not paid due tax on rest of the income amounting to ₹.32,75,000/- [65,50,000 – 32,75,000]. The Assessing Officer further noted that the assessee has deposited cash amounting to ₹.1,43,99,120/- in his bank accounts during the relevant assessment year. In response to the notice under section 142(1) of the Act, the assessee furnished reply and the contents are reproduced in page 3 of the assessment order. However, the Assessing Officer rejected the contention of the assessee and by considering the provisions of the IDS 2016, the disclosure of income of ₹.65,50,000/0 in IDS 2016 was added to the returned income of the assessee under section 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. Further, since the assessee could not furnish any documentary evidence in support of claim of deduction under Chapter VI- I.T.A. No.2761/Chny/24 3 A of ₹.1,68,170/-, the same was added to the returned income of the assessee. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer since the assessee did not furnish any written submission against various notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). 4. The ld. AR Shri Pawan Chakrapani, C.A. submits that due to the circumstances beyond assessee’s control, could not file written submission against the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). He placed on record paper book containing 47 pages and prayed that the assessee may be given one more opportunity for furnishing the details before the Assessing Officer and undertook that the assessee is ready to furnish the documentary evidences to substantiate his claim. 5. The ld. DR Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT submits that despite various opportunities afforded, the assessee did not file complete details before the Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(A) and prayed to dismiss the grounds. 6. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We have also perused the paper book filed by the ld. AR containing 47 pages which includes payment of taxes through Axis Bank, and assessee’s prayer to ld. PCIT for issue of Form 4 under IDS 2016. I.T.A. No.2761/Chny/24 4 Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not file any written submission/evidences in support of the grounds raised to substantiate his claim or responded to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). We note that the ld. AR undertakes that the assessee is ready to furnish all details if this Tribunal afford an opportunity to the assessee before the Assessing Officer. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and filing of evidences in the form of paper book as well as in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration after verification of documentary evidences as may be filed by the assessee and decide the claim of the assessee in accordance with law. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence in support of his claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 07th February, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (AMITABH SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 07.02.2025 I.T.A. No.2761/Chny/24 5 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 & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. "