GANI LATHIFSAHIB SHAKILA BANU,TRICHY V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), TRICHY

ITA 1952/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Gani Lathifsahib Shakila Banu against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal was initially delayed by 465 days, which was later condoned due to the assessee's medical treatment and a directive from the Madras High Court to approach the ITAT. The primary issue in the appeal was the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, which was contested due to lack of evidence at the initial assessment stage. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's request to present additional evidence and thus remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 773429 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 09-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANDHYA RANI KURE
• Assessee Lawyers: AARIF; CMA; KEERTHANA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी रȉेश नंदन सहाय, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1952/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Gani Lathifsahib Shakila Banu, 12, A1, First Main Road, Ramalinga Nagar, Woriur S.O., Tiruchirappalli 620 003. [PAN:BFFPS0785F] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2), Tiruchirappalli. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Aarif, CMA Advocate & Ms. Keerthana, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 17.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 11.01.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 465 days. The assessee filed petition for condonation of delay in support of an affidavit Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1952/Chny/25 2 stating that against the impugned order, the assessee preferred writ petition and vide order dated 19.03.2025 in W.P.(MD) No.5477 of 2025 and the Hon’ble High Court of Madras directed the assessee to prefer an appeal before the ITAT. Thereafter, the assessee was under medical treatment and produced medical certificate on record. We find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 3. We note that no representation whatsoever made before the Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(A), which is clear from para 10 of the assessment order and para 7.1 of the impugned order. 4. The ld. AR Shri Aarif, CMA prayed to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing officer as the assessee is ready to bring on record evidences in support of her claim before the Assessing officer. 5. The ld. DR Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT did report any objection. 6. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that the Assessing Officer made addition on account of unexplained money under section 69A of the Act for want of evidence, which is admitted by the ld. AR. The ld. AR referred to page 22 of the paper book and submits that the said Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1952/Chny/25 3 evidence of bank statement was not there before the Assessing Officer in respect of addition made thereon under section 69A of the Act. Therefore, considering the said evidence filed before the Tribunal, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file the evidence, if any in support of her claim. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 23rd September, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 23.09.2025 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "