INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 22(1), TAMBARAM, CHENNAI V. P BHUVANESWARI, INDIA

ITA 1779/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case revolves around an appeal by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A), which had deleted a substantial addition made by the AO regarding unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's account. The Revenue contended that the CIT(A) should have considered the cash deposits of Rs.1,81,44,750 for addition. However, the Tribunal found that the AO had incorrectly attributed the deposits of Rs. 49,37,07,350, which actually belonged to another individual, to the assessee. The Tribunal supported the CIT(A)'s decision to declare the proceedings as void ab initio, emphasizing the importance of jurisdiction and correct attribution of facts in legal proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470332 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NATHALA RAVI BABU
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1); 250; 48; 69A

Judgement Text

"Page - 1 - of 5 आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘बी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिर्क सदस्य एवं श्री अयिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1779 /Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Non-Corp. Ward-22(1), Tambaram, Chennai P.Bhuvaneswari, No.2/128A, Braminar Street, Madurantakam, Chengalpet District, Tamil Nadu - 603 306. [PAN: ARMPB3783A] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : None प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Nathala Ravi Babu, CIT सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 05.12.2024 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1061269382(1) dated 21.02.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18. Through the aforesaid appeal the Revenue has challenged order u/s 250 dated 21.02.2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi. ITA No.1779/Chny/2024 :- 2 -: Page - 2 - of 5 2.0 The only issue arising in this appeal of Revenue is regarding addition of Rs. 49,37,07,350/- u/s 69A made by the Ld. AO and which has been deleted by the Ld. CIT(A). On the impugned date of hearing there was no attendance from the assessee side. 2.1 It has been noted that there is a delay of 48 days in filing of this appeal by the Revenue. It has been pleaded that the concerned officer was handling additional charges and was overwhelmingly preoccupied with time barring assignments leading to delay in timely filing of this appeal. Upon considering the facts we are satisfied with the sufficiency of reasons and proceed to condone the delay and adjudicate this appeal. 3.0 The Ld. DR informed that the assessee is a non-filer and hence notice u/s 147 r.w. 148 was issued on 31.03.2021. The Ld. AO issued notices u/s 142(1) to the assessee along with questionnaire and show cause but there was no response. The Ld. AO noted from the information provided by the investigation wing that the assessee had deposited an amount of Rs. 49,37,07,350/- . In the absence of no return of income filed by the assessee and sheer non-compliance to the Ld. AO’s notices, addition u/s 69A of the impugned was made. ITA No.1779/Chny/2024 :- 3 -: Page - 3 - of 5 3.1 Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee contended that the Ld. AO has made totally wrong addition in her case in as much as information pertaining to one Shri Vellore Subramaniam Arumugam PAN No.AACPA026OE has been considered for addition in her case. It was contended that the local high pitched committee has acknowledged this fact while holding the assessment as high pitched assessment and also directing the Ld. AO to take remedial action in respect of cash deposits to assessee’s account of Rs. 1,81,44,750/-. Before the Ld.CIT(A) it was contended that the assessee is an authorized dealer of Indian Oil Petrol Pump and the cash deposits are its sales collection included in its overall turnover. Considering the directions of high pitched committee and after obtaining remand report from the Ld. AO, the Ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs. 49,37,07,350/- by declaring the proceedings u/s 147 / 148 as void ab initio. 4.0 We have considered the material on records in the light of arguments put forth by the Revenue. It is the case of the Revenue that the Ld.CIT(A) ought to have considered the cash deposits of Rs.1,81,44,750/- for addition. It was submitted that matter may be remitted back to the file of Ld. AO for consideration of impugned cash deposits of Rs.1,81,44,750/- by the Ld.AO. We do not find any merits in ITA No.1779/Chny/2024 :- 4 -: Page - 4 - of 5 the argument of the Revenue. It is an undisputed fact that the proceedings u/s. 147 / 148 were raised in the case of the assessee upon totally irrelevant and unconnected facts and therefore the same cannot be the ground for validating an erroneous and illegal order passed by the Ld.AO. Jurisdiction is the base of jurisprudence. The Ld. AO had initiated proceedings qua the alleged cash deposits of Rs. 49,37,07,350/- which were actually belonging to one Shri Vellore Subramaniam Arumugam PAN No.AACPA026OE, therefore by no stretch of imagination a presumption qua initiation of 147 / 148 proceedings in respect of the present assessee can be drawn. As rightly held by the high pitched committee the Ld. AO was at liberty to initiate remedial action against the assessee qua impugned cash deposits of Rs.1,81,44,750/-. Consequently, the request of the Revenue to remit the file to the Ld.AO cannot be accepted. The Revenue would be at liberty to initiate remedial action against the assessee qua impugned cash deposits of Rs.1,81,44,750/- in accordance with law. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity of the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and hence conclude that no intervention is required at this stage. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. ITA No.1779/Chny/2024 :- 5 -: Page - 5 - of 5 5.0 In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on 22nd, January-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- ( एबी टी. वकी) (ABY T VARKEY) न्यानयक सदस्य / Judicial Member Sd/- (अयिताभ शुक्ला) (AMITABH SHUKLA) लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, नदिांक/Dated: 22nd , January-2025 KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT – Chennai. 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF "