JAYAKUMAR MEENAKSHISUNDARAM, L/H. J.AMUDHA,CHENNAI V. ITO, N CW-3(1), CHENNAI

ITA 1205/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Jayakumar Meenakshisundaram, represented by his legal heir J. Amudha, against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi, which upheld an addition of Rs. 10,00,000 to the assessee's income for the Assessment Year 2010-11. The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under sections 144 and 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, following the reopening of the assessment due to unexplained cash deposits in the assessee's bank account. The assessee's explanation that the cash was from a withdrawal made earlier was not accepted by the AO, leading to the appeal. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices, as the assessee had passed away during the proceedings. The tribunal, after considering the documentary evidence provided, including a bank statement, found the assessee's explanation satisfactory and allowed the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 706078 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIJAY KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: G. AKASH
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ \u0011ा यपीठ, चे\u0016ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0019ी यस यस िव ने रिव, \u0011ा ियक सद एवं \u0019ी जगदीश, लेखा सद क े सम( BEFORE SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1205/Chny/2025 िनधा 8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2010-11 Jayakumar Meenakshisundaram, Rep. by J.Amudha (legal heir of the assessee), 13/7, Ganapathi Colony, 1st Street, Gopalapuram, Chennai – 600 086. [PAN: ANCPM 1242K] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward-3(1), Chennai. (अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant) (\b यथ\u0007/Respondent) अपीला थD की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri G. Akash, Advocate FGथD की ओर से /Respondent by : Shri Vijay Kumar, JCIT सुनवा ई की ता रीख/Date of Hearing : 17.06.2025 घोषणा की ता रीख /Date of Pronouncement : 30.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 23.06.2023 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 18.12.2017. ITA No.1205/Chny/2025 Jayakumar Meenakshisundaram, L/H J. Amudha :- 2 -: 2. There is a delay of 606 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition/affidavit of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned. 2. The assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 10,00,000/- in his savings bank account but had not filed return of income for the relevant assessment year. Consequently, the AO reopened the assessment by issuing a notice u/s 148 of the Act. The assessee explained that the source of the cash deposit was cash withdrawn on 18.09.2009 and deposited on 27.03.2010. However, the AO did not accept the explanation and made an addition of Rs. 10,00,000/-. Aggrieved by the said addition, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance with the notices issued during the appellate proceedings. 3. The Learned Authorized Representative (AR) submitted that the assessee had passed away during the appellate proceedings, and therefore, his wife could not file the appeal or respond to the notices in ITA No.1205/Chny/2025 Jayakumar Meenakshisundaram, L/H J. Amudha :- 3 -: time. The Ld. AR also submitted a copy of the bank account statement, which clearly shows cash withdrawal of Rs. 18 lakhs on 18.09.2009, thereby explaining the source of the cash deposit. 4. The Learned Departmental Representative (Ld. DR) relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the orders, we find that the AO made an addition of Rs.10,00,000/- on account of cash deposits, rejecting the assessee’s explanation that a loan of Rs. 18,99,850/- was taken from his nephew and withdrawn in cash on 18.09.2009. The AO disbelieved the explanation citing that there was a gap of over six months between the cash withdrawal and the cash deposit. We do not agree with the view of the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) that the amount withdrawn on 18.09.2009 could not have been kept in cash for such long duration and was the source of cash deposit without bringing any material that cash withdrawn has been used somewhere else. Once the source of cash is explained and supported by documentary evidence, such explanation cannot be rejected solely on the basis of ITA No.1205/Chny/2025 Jayakumar Meenakshisundaram, L/H J. Amudha :- 4 -: time gap. In our view, the explanation offered by the assessee is satisfactory. Accordingly, we delete the addition made by the AO. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on 30th day of June, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (यस यस िव ने रिव) (SS Viswanethra Ravi) \u0001याियक \u0001याियक \u0001याियक \u0001याियक सद\bय सद\bय सद\bय सद\bय / Judicial Member (जगदीश) (Jagadish) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य /Accountant Member चे\u0013नई/Chennai, \u0016दनांक/Dated: 30th June, 2025. EDN/- आदेश क\u0019 \bितिल प अ े षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u000f/CIT, Chennai 4. िवभागीय \bितिनिध/DR 5. गाड\u0018 फाईल/GF "