आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.611/Chny/2021 िनधा रणवष /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mr.R.T.Kripakaran, S/o Late R.Thirunavukkarasu, Plot No.61B, Flat No.D, Sri Hari Bagya Flats, Chompet Salai, 2 nd Street, Nanmangalam, Chennai-600 129. v. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward-22(7), Tambaram. [PAN:AFFPR 9083 L] (अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) अपीलाथ क ओर से/ Appellant by : None यथ क ओर से /Respondent by : Mr.HemaBhupal, JCIT सुनवाईक तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16.082022 घोषणाक तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 16.08.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Assessing Officer u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Tambaram, dated 12.11.2019and pertains to assessment year 2017-18, making addition of cash deposits of Rs.20,60,800/- made during the period of demonetization. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: I am not agreeing with the computation of income tax for the AY2017 by the AO आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ यायपीठ, चे ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI ी महावीर िसंह, उपा , एवं डॉ। दीपक पी रपोटे, लेखा सद के सम BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.611/Chny/2021 :: 2 :: The AO did not consider the loan from ICICI bank via loan account No. LPCHE00033701207, 31/10/15. Amounting to 14,50,000 (Rupees Fourteen Lakh Fifty Thousand Only) The AO did not consider my income from my Amazon employment of Rs.5,78,399 (Rupees Five Lakh Seventy-Eight Thousand Three Hundred and Ninety Nine Only) The AO did not even care about my explanations about the stamp vendor business where in I must purchase the stamp papers from the government treasury by cash and I get only meager commission out of it. The AO considered all the indent amount as my income which is incorrect. I met the AO Bharathi Ganesan personally and explained but the rectification was not done on time. I sent replies to the AO Bharathi Ganesan via registered post on 15/2/2020 and on 7/3/2020, the same has been sent via email (proof attached) Demand calculated by A.O. is Prejudicial to me and, if appeal is not allowed to be proceeded it amounting to against the law. Hope above ground of appeal is valid for taking the matter in appeal. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, this case is decided based on the merits of the case with the help of ld.DR. 4. We have heard the ld.DR and perused the materials available on record. It is observed that there is a delay. However, it is a fact that there was a pandemic during that period.Hence, delay in filing of the appeal is condoned. 5. It is observed that the assessee has filed an appeal against the order of the AO passed u/s.143(3) of the Act. As per the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Assessee can file appeal against the order passed u/s.143(3) of the Act before the Ld.Commissioner of Income tax (Appeal),(Ld.CIT(A)). If aggrieved with the orders of the Ld.CIT(A) assessee has a right to file appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal(ITAT).However, in this case, assessee has directly filed an appeal ITA No.611/Chny/2021 :: 3 :: before the ITAT. The list of appeals which are maintainable before the ITATare mentioned in Sec.253 of the Act. The appeal filed against sec.143(3) of the Act, is not maintainable before the ITAT. Therefore, this appeal is not maintainable before the ITAT. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as not maintainable. Order pronounced on the 16 th day of August, 2022, in Chennai. Sd/- (महावीरिसंह) (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा /VICE PRESIDENT Sd/- (डॉ।दीपकपी रपोटे) (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) लेखासद य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे ई/Chennai, !दनांक/Dated: 16 th August, 2022. TLN आदेश क ितिलिप अ$ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 4. आयकरआयु&/CIT 2. यथ /Respondent 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 3. आयकरआयु& (अपील)/CIT(A) 6. गाड फाईल/GF