BALAN SUNILKUMAR,CHENNAI V. ASSESSING OFFICER, CHENNAI

ITA 3193/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Mr. Balan Sunilkumar against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which was passed ex parte due to the assessee's non-response to multiple notices. The primary issue in the appeal was the addition of cash deposits amounting to Rs.16,72,738 to the assessee's income for the Assessment Year 2009-10, which was initially added by the Assessing Officer based on scrutiny of the assessee's return of income. The Tribunal noted that a significant number of the notices were issued during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have affected the assessee's ability to respond. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to grant another opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the nature and source of the cash deposits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312617 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: K. BALAJI; STAFF
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ \u0001यायपीठ, चे ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0001ी एबी टी. वक , ाियक सद\u0011 एवं एवं एवं एवं \u0001ी जगदीश, लेखा सद क े सम\u0015 BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3193/Chny/2024 िनधा\u000eरणवष\u000e/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mr. Balan Sunilkumar, No.321/4, Mohanram Nagar, Mogappair West, Chennai-600 037. v. The ITO, Ward-VI (3), Chennai. [PAN: BDYPS 3425 B] (अपीलाथ\u0016/Appellant) (\u0017\u0018यथ\u0016/Respondent) अपीलाथ\u0016 क\u001a ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.K. Balaji, Staff \u0017\u0018यथ\u0016 क\u001a ओर से /Respondent by : Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाईक\u001aतारीख/Date of Hearing : 12.03.2025 घोषणाक\u001aतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 29.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)-1, (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.CIT(A)”), Vadodara, dated 14.10.2024 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as \"AY”) 2009-10. 2. At the outset, it has been brought to our notice that the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) is an ex parte order. It has been brought to our ITA No.3193/Chny/2024 (AY 2009-10) Mr. Balan Sunilkumar :: 2 :: notice that despite seven (7) notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee has not responded to it, which led to the passing of the impugned order ex parte qua assessee. In this regard, it was brought to our notice that out of seven (7) notices, four (4) notices have been issued during the time of Covid-19 pandemic period and only three (3) notices have been issued at a short interval of three months. Since the assessee was out of the station couldn’t respond, which resulted in passing of the ex parte order. Therefore, he prays that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee and the assessee undertakes to diligently appear/file relevant documents before the Ld.CIT(A) without fail. 3. Per contra, the Ld.DR doesn’t want us to give one more innings to the assessee. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that the assessee had filed his return of income (RoI) on 21.10.2009 declaring total income at Rs.3,33,770/- which was later selected for scrutiny under CASS based on the information of cash deposits of Rs.16,72,738/-. Since the assessee couldn’t prove the nature and source of cash deposits, the AO added the entire cash deposits of Rs.16,72,738/- by assessment order dated 29.12.2011. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal ex parte qua assessee since there was no response from the assessee despite having issued seven (7) ITA No.3193/Chny/2024 (AY 2009-10) Mr. Balan Sunilkumar :: 3 :: notices to the assessee. It is noted that out of seven (7) notices, four (4) notices were issued during Covid-19 pandemic period and only three (3) notices were issued between 25.05.2023 and 27.09.2024. The assessee before us stated that he was out of station, so the notices couldn’t be served upon him which resulted in dismissal of the appeal and prayed for one more opportunity before the Ld.CIT(A). Considering the overall facts of the case, we are of the view that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to prove the nature and source of cash deposits of Rs.16,72,738/- and therefore, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to decide the grounds of appeal on merits. The assessee shall file/appear diligently before the Ld.CIT(A) and produce/upload the relevant documents to prove the nature and source of cash deposits and the Ld.CIT(A) to decide the grounds of appeal in accordance to sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Income Tax Act after hearing the assessee. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 29th day of April, 2025, in Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (जगदीश) (JAGADISH) लेखा सद /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (एबी टी. वक ) (ABY T. VARKEY) \u0001याियक सद\bय/JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3193/Chny/2024 (AY 2009-10) Mr. Balan Sunilkumar :: 4 :: चे ई/Chennai, !दनांक/Dated: 29th April, 2025. TLN आदेश क\u001a \u0017ितिलिप अ$ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\u0010/Appellant 2. \u0011\u0012थ\u0010/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु\u0018/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय\u0011ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड फाईल/GF "