GANESAN,NAGAPATTINAM V. ITO, WARD-2, NAGAPATTINAM

ITA 3011/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Ganesan, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which upheld the Assessing Officer's decision regarding unexplained cash deposits during the demonetization period. The Tribunal noted the assessee's non-participation in the initial assessments due to his unawareness of the proceedings, attributed to his taking over the family business under distressing circumstances. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's arguments and evidence, leading to the decision to remit the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 827424 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 29-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARV SREENIVASAN; C.I.T
• Assessee Lawyers: J. SARAVANAN
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, ‘डी’ \u000eयायपीठ, चे\u000eनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI \u0015ी मनु क ुमार ग\u0019र, \u000eया\u001aयक सद य एवं \u0015ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद य क े सम$ BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:3011/Chny/2025 \u001aनधा%रण वष% / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ganesan, 46, Katchanam Road, Kilvelur, Nagapattinam – 611 104. vs. ITO, Ward -2, Nagapattinam. [PAN:BJCPG-6832-L] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) अपीलाथ' क+ ओर से/Appellant by : Mr. J. Saravanan, Advocate ()यथ' क+ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, C.I.T. सुनवाई क+ तार ख/Date of Hearing : 16.12.2025 घोषणा क+ तार ख/Date of Pronouncement : 05.01.2026 आदेश /O R D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM : This appeal of the assessee is filed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, (in short “ld.CIT(A)”) for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2017-18, vide order dated 31.07.2025. 2. At the outset, we observe that there is a delay of 29 days in the filing of the present appeal by the assessee. The assessee has furnished an affidavit explaining that the assessee the assessee did not view the Income -Tax e-filing portal during the relevant period of passing of the ld. CIT(A)’s order and he became aware in the third week of October 2025 and immediately filed the appeal on 29.10.2025. Upon perusal of the affidavit and after affording due Printed from counselvise.com :-2-: ITA. No:3011/Chny/2025 opportunity of hearing to both parties, we are satisfied that the assessee has demonstrated sufficient and reasonable cause for not presenting the appeal within the statutory period prescribed under law. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, earning income from sale of consumer products and Aircel Distributor of Prepaid SIM Card and had not filed his return of income for AY 2017-18. Based on the information available with the department, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee has made cash deposits to the tune of Rs.30,31,500/- during the demonetization period from 09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016 and a total cash deposit of Rs.2,39,20,031/- during the F.Y. 2016-17, apart from deposits other than cash of Rs.23,75,174/- into his Current Account maintained with Indian Bank. The Assessing Officer issued statutory notices and called for details, but the assessee failed to respond to any of the notices. Since the assessee did not participate in the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer concluded the assessment u/s.144 of the Act on 30.10.2019 by making an addition of Rs.2,39,20,031/- as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act and Rs.1,90,014/- as 8% of non-cash credits treated as profits and arrived a total income of Rs.2,41,10,045/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A), NFAC on 30.11.2019. 5. At the outset, we observed that ld.CIT(A) has not considered the additional evidence submitted by the assessee owing to the document not being submitted before the Assessing Officer and unsatisfactory and incomplete evidence filed before the first appellate authority. Hence, the ld.CIT(A), NFAC not allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and upheld the order of the AO by passing an order dated 31.07.2025. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before us. Printed from counselvise.com :-3-: ITA. No:3011/Chny/2025 6. The ld.AR submitted that the assessee was forced to take care of that business from his father since 2016 due to poor health condition of the father and the assessee unaware of the income tax proceedings and hence he was not aware of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer as well as the ld.CIT(A) and hence he could not appear before the Assessing Officer as well as ld.CIT(A). Further, the ld.AR submitted that the ld.CIT(A) failed to consider the additional evidence filed before the first appellate authority. In view of the above, the ld.AR prayed that the Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the order of CIT(A) and remit the issues to the file of Assessing Officer. Further, ld.AR assured the bench that the ld.AR will represent on behalf of the assessee before the AO to complete the assessment proceedings effectively. 7. Per contra, the ld.DR submitted that both the Assessing Officer and the ld.CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunity to appear before them. However, the assessee has been negligent in responding to the statutory notices and hence, prayed for confirming the order of the ld.CIT(A). 8. We have heard the rival parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We note that the AO has passed an ex-parte order by considering the information available with the department and the same has been not allowed by the ld.CIT(A), NFAC due to non-participation of the assessee before the Assessing Officer as well as the ld.CIT(A). Since, the assessee has failed to participate before the Assessing Officer as well as the first appellate authority, we levy the cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble High Court of Madras within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and the assessee shall satisfy the payment of cost before the authorities. 9. In view of the above and to meet the ends of justice we set aside the order of ld.CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of AO and direct the AO to denovo frame the assessment order in accordance with law, after providing Printed from counselvise.com :-4-: ITA. No:3011/Chny/2025 reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee to be diligent and file written submissions and relevant documents if advised so. 10. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 05th January, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनु क ुमार ग\u0019र) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) \u000eया\u001aयक सद य/Judicial Member (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (S. R. RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सद य/Accountant Member चे\u000eनई/Chennai, /दनांक/Dated, the 05th January, 2026 SP आदेश क+ (\u001aत1ल2प अ3े2षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ'/Appellant 2. ()यथ'/Respondent 3.आयकर आयु4त/CIT– Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem 4. 2वभागीय (\u001aत\u001aन ध/DR 5. गाड% फाईल/GF Printed from counselvise.com "