EKAMBARAM MANONMANI ,SALEM V. ITO, WARD-1(6), SALEM

ITA 88/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Ekambaram Manonmani, an individual dealer for Indian Oil Corporation Ltd., who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The AO had made additions to the assessee's income on account of unexplained cash deposits during demonetization and additional gross profits. The CIT(A) confirmed these additions ex-parte as the assessee failed to respond to notices. The assessee, represented by Mr. T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, Advocate, argued that the notices were not received, preventing her from appearing. The Departmental Representative opposed any leniency due to the assessee's default in appearance.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 29897 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: T.S. LAKSHMI VENKATRAMAN
• Keywords: Set aside; Income from undisclosed sources; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 69A

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ \u000fा यपीठ, चे\u0014ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI \u0016ी मनु क ुमा र िग\u001bर ,\u000fा ियक सद एवं \u0016ी जगदीश , लेखा सद क े सम& BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.88/Chny/2025 (िनधा\u0005रण वष\u0005 / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Smt. Ekambaram Manonmani, 1139, C.P.Indane Gas Service, South Udayarpalayam, Attur, Salem-636 102. Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(6), Salem. PAN : ADGPM-2859-J (अपीलाथ\u000f/Appellant) (\u0010\u0011यथ\u000f/Respondent) अपीलाथ\u000fक\u0014ओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr.T.S.Lakshmi Venkatraman, Advocate \u0010\u0011यथ\u000fक\u0014ओरसे/Respondent by : Smt. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाईक\bतारीख/Date of hearing : 18.03.2025 घोषणाक\bतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 24.03.2025 आदेश आदेश आदेश आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM: The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)(NFAC) Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 16.08.2023 for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts are as under: The assessee is an individual, who is a dealer for Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. engaged in marketing of LPG refills activity filed her return of income on 07.01.2018 admitting total income of Rs.16,83,690/- for assessment year 2017-18. Subsequently, case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s.142(1) has been issued to the assessee. However, the assessee failed to respond to the notices. Thus, the AO completed the assessment. In fact, AO 2 ITA No. 88/Chny/2025 made an addition of Rs.27,67,500/- on account of cash deposits during demonetization in the assessee bank account treating as unexplained and unaccounted income u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and further made an addition of Rs.68,28,680/- on account of addition gross profits. 3. Assessee further challenged the order of assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act before the ld.CIT(A) who proceeded ex-parte and confirmed the order of the AO on merits. 4. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us. 5. Before us, the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has sent the notices which were not received by the assessee, hence, the assessee was prevented from appearance on the purported dates. Therefore, he prayed that the assessee may be provided an adequate and proper representation time to file evidence and documents, if any, to substantiate her explanation regarding cash deposits during demonetization and addition on account addition gross profits. The ld.DR stated that the assessee has defaulted in appearing before the appellate authority hence, no lenient view is to be taken in this case and prayed for dismissal of appeal. 3 ITA No. 88/Chny/2025 6. Though we concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice and grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We also find that assessee has not represented before the ld.CIT(A) despite notices for the reasons stated above. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo appeal hearing after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee subject to cost of Rs.5,000/- which shall be deposited by the assessee within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order to ‘Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority’ at Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The proof of the same will be furnished by the Assessee before Ld.CIT(A), who shall proceed for fresh appeal hearing, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate her case with all evidence and documents regarding cash deposits during demonetization etc. if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appeal proceedings as per law. The ld. AR, who appeared also assured the bench that he will ensure that the assessee will prosecute her case diligently before the ld.CIT(A). 4 ITA No. 88/Chny/2025 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 24th March, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (जगदीश ) ( मनु क ुमार िग\u001bर ) ( Jagadish ) ( Manu Kumar Giri) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सद\u0003य सद\u0003य सद\u0003य सद\u0003य / Accountant Member \u000fाियक सद / Judicial Member चे\u0019ई/Chennai, \u001bदनांक/Date:24.03.2025 DS आदेश क\u0007 \bितिलिप अ\u000eेिषत/Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u0013/CIT Salem 4. िवभागीय \bितिनिध/DR 5. गाड फाईल/GF. "