GEETHA SELVAM,CHENNAI V. ITO, NCW-10(2), CHENNAI

ITA 1319/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Geetha Selvam against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the addition of unexplained money in the assessee's hands for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary issue was the treatment of a cash deposit of \\u20b934,20,360 as unexplained under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal noted that the initial assessment order did not include this addition, which was later incorporated in a rectification order under section 154. The Tribunal decided to remand the case for a fresh assessment, considering the details already provided by the assessee regarding the cash deposits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717277 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 07-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V.SUPRAJA
• Assessee Lawyers: D.ANAND
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 69

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 अिमताभ शुƑा, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1319/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Geetha Selvam, No.28, Sengundram, Anna Street, Redhills, Chennai 600 052. [PAN:AVJPG1070A] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 10(2), Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. V. Supraja, Addl.CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 17.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 14.08.2025 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 06.06.2024 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 249 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1319/Chny/25 2 prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee raised 6 grounds of appeal amongst which, the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in confirming the addition in the hands of the assessee exparte in the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that the assessment order dated 05.12.2019 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] has been completed without making any addition, but, however, the Assessing Officer treated the cash deposit of ₹.34,20,360/- as unexplained money under section 69 of the Act. We find no computation of income made to that effect. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer included the computation sheet in 154 proceedings by stating that the said computation sheet was omitted to be included in the assessment order dated 05.12.2019. We find the said order under section 154 of the Act has been challenged before NFAC, Delhi, wherein, the addition is confirmed in the hands of the assessee exparte. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1319/Chny/25 3 5. The ld. AR Shri D. Anand, Advocate submits that the assessee has furnished every detail in respect of cash deposits during demonetization period, but however, not considered by the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR prayed to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh verification. The ld. DR Ms. V. Supraja, Addl. CIT did not report any objection in respect of the same. Thus, taking into account the submissions of the ld. AR and the ld. DR and in the interest of natural justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh after considering the submissions/ documentary evidences already furnished by the assessee. The assessee is at liberty to file details, if any, to substantiate her claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 14th August, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (AMITABH SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 14.08.2025 Vm/- Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.1319/Chny/25 4 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 "