ARUNACHALAM,VALLAM ROAD, SHENCOTTAH V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, TIRUNELVELI, INCOME TAX OFFICE, TIRUNELVELI

ITA 2754/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Arunachalam, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee had not filed a return of income for the specified year but was found to have deposited Rs. 10,00,000 in cash during the demonetization period, which led to a reopened assessment by the Assessing Officer (A.O.). The A.O. made an addition of Rs. 10,00,000 as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to non-compliance in providing necessary details. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte as the assessee failed to provide supporting documents. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the principles of natural justice, remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 824479 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 06-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LATCHANA
• Assessee Lawyers: T.VASUDEVAN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ ा यपीठ, चे\u0012ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0015ी यस यस िव\u0018ने\u001a रिव, ा ियक सद एवं सु\u0015ी प ा वित यस, लेखा सद क े सम$ BEFORE SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. PADMAVATHY.S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2754/Chny/2025 िनधा %रण वष% /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arunachalam, No.52, Vallam Road, Shencottah, Tirunelveli – 627 809. PAN: BGBPA 4117L Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tirunelveli. (अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant) (\b यथ\u0007/Respondent) अपीला थ( की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr. T.Vasudevan, Advocate *+थ( की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. Latchana, JCIT सुनवा ई की ता रीख/Date of Hearing : 16.12.2025 घोषणा की ता रीख /Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2025 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 06.08.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. The assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income for A.Y 2017-18. The A.O received information that the assessee has deposited cash to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/- into the bank account during the demonetization period. The A.O reopened the assessment and called on the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2754/Chny/2025 Arunachalam :- 2 -: assessee to furnish the various details. The A.O further noticed that the assessee has received cash in specified bank notices (SBNs), which is deposited into his account and the same amount is paid back to M/s. Poonam Trading Company on the same day by way of two DDs. Since, the assessee did not appear nor responded to the notices issued by the A.O, the A.O completed the assessment u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act, wherein he made an addition of Rs. 10,00,000/- u/s. 69A of the Act towards unexplained money. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte for the reason that the assessee did not file any details or supporting documents. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A). 3. We have heard the both the parities, perused the material available on record. The Ld. AR submitted that the notices by the lower authorities are issued to the wrong email ID of the assessee and hence, the same could not be responded. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee had responded to all the notices of the CIT(A) by seeking adjournments to compile the details sought for. The Ld. A.R also submitted that the assessee did not respond only to the last notice and that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine without giving further time. The A.R accordingly prayed for one more opportunity to represent the case properly before the CIT(A). The ld. DR, on the other hand, vehemently objected stating that the assessee has been non- compliant and therefore, the CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal. Considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to the assessee's case, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee in the interest of natural justice and fair play. Accordingly, we are remitting the appeal back to the CIT(A) with a direction to call for the necessary details in order to decide the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2754/Chny/2025 Arunachalam :- 3 -: appeal on merits in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to submit the required details as may be called for and cooperate with the appellate proceedings without seeking unnecessary adjournments. It is ordered accordingly. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 31st day of December, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (यस यस िव\u0018ने\u001a रिव) (SS Viswanethra Ravi) \u0001याियक \u0001याियक \u0001याियक \u0001याियक सद\bय सद\bय सद\bय सद\bय / Judicial Member (प ा वित यस) (Padmavathy.S) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य /Accountant Member चे\u0013नई/Chennai, \u0016दनांक/Dated: 31st December, 2025. EDN, Sr. P.S आदेश क\u0019 \bितिल प अ े षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u000f/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय \bितिनिध/DR 5. गाड\u0018 फाईल/GF Printed from counselvise.com "