ANDAVAR GOVINDARAJAN KRISHNA,COIMBATORE V. NCW, 4(4), COIMBATORE

ITA 3340/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Andavar Govindarajan Krishna, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The appellant did not initially file a return of income, and upon investigation, it was found that he had deposited cash amounting to Rs.5,73,000 using an old PAN. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and added the amount under section 69A. The appellant's appeal was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) due to non-response to notices. The tribunal, considering the circumstances and the appellant's reliance on a chartered accountant who faced personal issues, decided to remit the case back to the AO for a detailed examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837526 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: S. SRIDHAR; ERODE
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI सुŵी पदमावती यस, लेखा सद˟ एवं ŵी मनु क ुमार िगįर, Ɋाियक सद˟ क े समƗ BEFORE MS. PADMAVATHY.S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3340/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Andavar Govindarajan Krishna, 1 SesiAvenue, Kalapatti Road Civil Aerodrome Post, Coimbatore – 641 014. PAN: AGRPK 4745M Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward-4(4), Coimbatore. (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) (Through virtual mode) ŮȑथŎ की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl.CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 13.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 17.02.2026 आदेश / O R D E R PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short \"CIT(A)\") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short \"the Act\") dated 12.11.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. The assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income for the year under consideration. The assessing officer noticed that the assessee has deposited cash and withdrawn cash from his bank account. The assessing officer accordingly reopened the assessment by showing notice under section Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3340/Chny/2025 Andavar Govindarajan Krishna :- 2 -: 148 of the act. The assessee submitted that there are PAN and that the return of income is filed in the new PAN. However the assessing officer noticed that the assessee has deposited cash to the tune of Rs.5,73,000 using the old PAN and therefore added the said amount under section 69 a of the act. Aggrieved the assessee filed the appeal before the CIT(A). Since the assessee did not respond to the notices the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte. The assessee is an appeal before the tribunal against the order of the CIT(A). 3. We heard the parties and perused the material on record. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee being an agricultural is not having adequate computer knowledge and is solely dependent on the chartered accountant with regard to the income tax matters. The Ld. AR further submitted that the chartered accountant had certain personal issues with regard to his wife's health and therefore could not concentrate on the assessee's tax -related matters. The Ld. AR therefore submitted that the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the CIT(A) and could not represent the case properly before the assessing officer. Accordingly the Ld. AR prayed for one more opportunity. We notice from the perusal of the assessment order that the addition is made based on the fact that the assessee has deposited the impugned amount using his old PAN. We further notice that in this regard the assessing officer did not examine the issue on merits by calling for any details. We also noticed that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal since the assessee did not respond to the notices. Considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to assessee's case, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the claim that the amount deposited is from Gold Loans obtained by producing the required details. Accordingly we remit the back to the AO with the direction to call for necessary details Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3340/Chny/2025 Andavar Govindarajan Krishna :- 3 -: and decide the issue in accordance with law. The assessee is required to submit the necessary details as may be called for and cooperate with appellate proceedings. It is ordered accordingly. 4. The assessee through additional ground raised certain legal contentions with regard to the validity of reopening under section 148 of the act. The Ld. AR during the course of hearing did not press for admission of the additional ground. Accordingly the additional grounds are not admitted for adjudication. 5. In result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 17th day of February, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनु क ुमार िगįर) (Manu Kumar Giri) ᭠याियक सद᭭य / Judicial Member (पदमावती यस) (Padmavathy.S) लेखा सदèय /Accountant Member चेÛनई/Chennai, Ǒदनांक/Dated: 17th February, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF Printed from counselvise.com "