GANESAN NAKKEERAN,CHENNAI V. ITO, NCW-14(1), CHENNAI

ITA 2089/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Ganesan Nakkeeran, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) confirming the addition of Rs. 51.20 Lacs as unexplained cash credit for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The assessment was initially framed under section 144 read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, based on information that the assessee had deposited cash exceeding Rs. 10 Lacs in his bank account and engaged in share transactions. The assessee, a non-filer, was found to have deposited Rs. 51.20 Lacs in HDFC Bank, purportedly to buy shares for his brother-in-law, Mr. Maruthuvanan Senthil Nathan, an NRI. However, the explanation provided was not substantiated, leading to the addition being confirmed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to give the assessee another opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472377 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 06-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 06-08-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V.SREENIVASAN LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: K.MEENAKSHISUNDARAM ITP LD
• Keywords: Set aside; Unexplained cash credit; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” \u000eा यपीठ चे\u0013ई म\u0016। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, CHENNAI मा ननीय \u0019ी मनोज क ुमा र अ\u001dवा ल ,लेखा सद# एवं मा ननीय \u0019ी मनु क ुमा र िग&र, \u000eा ियक सद# क े सम'। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं ./ ITA No.2089/Chny/2024 (िनधा (रणवष( / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Shri Ganesan Nakkeeran Old No.3, New No.5, 9th Cross Street, Shanthi Nagar, Adambakkam, Chennai-600 088. बना म/ Vs. ITO Non-Corporate Ward-14(1) Chennai. \u0001थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AABPN-6217-D (अपीलाथ\u001c/Appellant) : (\u001f थ\u001c / Respondent) अपीलाथ\u001cकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri K. Meenakshi Sundaram (ITP)– Ld.AR \u001f थ\u001cकीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan(Addl.CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 06-11-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 06-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 17-06-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.144 r.w.s 147 of the Act on 29-12-2018. The sole grievance of the assessee is against confirmation of addition of Rs.51.20 Lacs as unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act. The Ld. AR has prayed for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. It could be seen that the assessment has been framed on best judgment basis u/s 144. 2. The case was reopened pursuant to information that the assessee deposited cash of more than Rs.10 Lacs in his bank account and also dealt with in share transactions. The assessee remained a non-filer. There was deposit of Rs.51.20 Lacs in HDFC Bank. It was stated that the account was used to buy shares for his brother-in-law Mr. Maruthuvanan Senthil Nathan (Non-resident Indian). It was also stated that cash was withdrawn from the account of Shri Senthil Nathan held with SBI, Guindy branch and the assessee had power to operate the said account in order to make investment as per the directions of Shri Senthil Nathan. The cash deposited in assessee’s bank account was stated to be utilized by him towards purchase of shares using assessee’s de-mat account. To support the same, the assessee furnished a letter from Shri Senthil Nathan. However, upon verification, it was found that the said bank account did not belong to Shri Senthil Nathan. Finally, rejecting the explanation of the assessee, the bank deposit of Rs.51.20 Lacs was added to the income of the assessee. In the absence of any further supporting documents as forthcoming from the assessee, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. The Ld. AR has reiterated the above factual position and submitted that given another opportunity, the assessee could substantiate its case. The same has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR who referred to the findings of Ld. AO in the assessment order. 4. Undisputedly, the assessee has failed to substantiate its stand before lower authorities. However, accepting the plea of Ld. AR and keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case before lower authorities. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its case. 5. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 06th November, 2024. Sd/- (MANU KUMAR GIRI) \u000eा ियक सद# / JUDICIAL MEMBER Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखा सद# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे3ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated :06-11-2024 DS आदेशकीHितिलिपअ\u001dेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u001c/Appellant 2. \u001f थ\u001c/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु