ANNAI KRC EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI V. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-2, CHENNAI

ITA 2813/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Annai KRC Educational and Charitable Trust, which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2018-19. The primary issue was the dismissal of the appeal in limine by the CIT(A) due to a 51-day delay in filing the appeal. The Assessing Officer had previously treated a significant amount of cash deposits made during the demonetization period as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's request to condone the delay and to reconsider the jurisdictional challenge regarding the faceless assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 824480 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2025
• Other Referred Cases: TVS Credit Services Ltd. v. DCIT [2025] (8) TMI 217 dated 24.06.2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LATCHANA
• Assessee Lawyers: G.REDDI PRAKASH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Unexplained cash credit; Charitable institution
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1); 68

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं सुŵी एस.पȧावती,, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Ms. S. Padmavathy, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2813/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Annai KRC Educational and Charitable Trust, No. 6, Ekambaram Street, Pammal, Pammal S.O., Kanchipuram, Chennai 600 075. [PAN: AAGTA2043K] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward 2, Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri G. Reddi Prakash, CA ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Latchana, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 17.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2025 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 23.09.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. The assessee raised 10 grounds of appeal amongst which, the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in dismissing the appeal in limine. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2813/Chny/25 2 3. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee made cash deposits during demonetization period at ₹.1,89,59,500/- with City Union Bank and ₹.34,84,500/- with Karur Vysya Bank. After following due procedure, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] on 13.03.2024. In response to the said notice, the assessee filed return of income on 10.04.2024. Thereafter, notices under section 142(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee to explain the source for the cash deposits. The response filed by the assessee to the transactions under question amounting to ₹.2,24,44,000/- are reproduced at pages 5 to 8 of the assessment order. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 25.03.2025 by treating ₹.1,77,90,145/- as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal since the assessee failed to furnish explanation for the delay of 51 days in filing the appeal. 4. The ld. AR Shri G. Reddi Prakash, CA submits that the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against assessment order. The assessee has acknowledged the delay in filing the appeal in Form 35 and explained the reasons, but, however, the ld. CIT(A) rejected Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2813/Chny/25 3 explanation of the assessee and dismissed the appeal. He submits that the delay in filing the appeal is neither wilful nor wanton, but, beyond the control of the assessee. The ld. AR prayed that the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) may be condoned. The ld. AR further submits that the assessee raised a legal ground before the ld. CIT(A) that without jurisdiction, the Faceless Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act without issuing notice under section 148 of the Act and the same may be allowed to raise before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. DR Ms. Latchana, JCIT did not raise any objection. 5. Considering the submissions of the ld. AR and the ld. DR, we direct the ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay in filing the appeal as well as consider the legal ground and pass order in accordance with law keeping in mind the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of TVS Credit Services Ltd. v. DCIT [2025] (8) TMI 217 dated 24.06.2025 by granting reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2813/Chny/25 4 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 31st December, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (S. PADMAVATHY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 31.12.2025 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. Printed from counselvise.com "