KUPPUSWAMY SRINIVASAN DIVWAKARAN,CHENNAI V. ITO NON CORP WARD 3(1), CHENAI

ITA 489/CHNY/2026

AI Insights

The case involves Kuppuswamy Srinivasan Diwakaran, the appellant, who appealed against the penalty imposed by the Income Tax Officer under section 271DA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for violations of sections 269SS and 269ST. The penalty of ₹15,50,000 was levied due to the assessee's failure to comply with the statutory provisions concerning the acceptance and repayment of loans and cash gifts. The assessee's initial appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-submission of required documents and explanations. The tribunal, considering the technical issues faced by the assessee in accessing the ITBA portal, decided to remand the case for a fresh evaluation.

• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Chennai
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2026
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V SREENIVASAN
• Assessee Lawyers: J. SARAVANAN
• Keywords: Gift

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी इंट ूरी रामाराव, लेखा सद˟ एवं ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ क े समƗ । Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.489/Chny/2026 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Kuppuswamy Srinivasan Diwakaran, Flat 5B, Uma Complex, Balfour Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010. [PAN: AMJPD4417B] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 3(1), Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri J. Saravanan, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri AR V Sreenivasan, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 16.03.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 24.03.2026 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 05.12.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21 under section 271DA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. 2. At the outset, it is noted that since the assessee has taken loans and cash gifts, the details are reflected at page 5 of the penalty order, in violation of provisions of section 269SS and 269ST of the Act, the Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.489/Chny/26 2 Assessing Officer levied penalty of ₹.15,50,000/- under section 271DA of the Act. As there was no compliance by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A), the appeal of the assessee was dismissed for want of written submissions/documentary evidence. 3. The ld. AR Shri J. Saravanan, Advocate contended that the assessee could not login into the ITBA portal on 09.10.2025 and 25.10.2025 due to technical glitches. He submits that non-response to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) is neither wilful nor wanton and due to circumstances beyond its control. He submits that the assessee is ready to furnish explanation with evidences relating to the receipt of gifts/loans against levy of penalty under section 271DA of the Act and prayed for one more opportunity to the assessee in the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after considering the explanation/documentary evidences. 4. The ld. DR Shri AR V Sreenivasan, CIT relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). 5. Having heard both the parties and on considering the submissions of the ld. AR & the ld. DR, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A), admittedly, as there was no assistance from the assessee in respect of penalty levied by the Assessing Officer under Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.489/Chny/26 3 section 271DA of the Act during the first appellate proceedings. Since the assessee expressed his readiness to pursue his case relating to levy of penalty, in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration after considering the explanation/ documentary evidence as may be filed by the assessee and pass order in accordance with law. 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 24th March, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 24.03.2026 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 "