MOHAN DOSS GANDHI P,CHENNAI V. ITO WARD 1, THANJAVUR, THANJAVUR

ITA 3511/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves five appeals filed by Mohandoss Gandhi P No.433/10, the proprietor of M/s. D&R Agencies, against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the Assessment Years 2018-19 and 2020-21. The appeals were consolidated due to identical facts and issues. The appellant did not file a regular return of income for the Assessment Year 2018-19, but the Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act based on information about cash deposits, withdrawals, and investments in equity shares. The AO made an addition of Rs.2,40,00,744 as unexplained investment. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 832045 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 27-11-2025
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra 279 CTR 614
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SBR KUMAR LAGHIMSETTI
• Assessee Lawyers: LAVANYA
• Keywords: Unexplained investment
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3510/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2018-19 ITA No.3511/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2018-19 ITA No.3512/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2018-19 ITA No.3513/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2018-19 ITA No.3514/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2020-21 Mohandoss Gandhi P No.433/10, Prop. M/s. D&R Agencies, Mannargudi Road, Kannanthankudi Melaiyur, Orathanadu, Tamil Nadu-614 625. [PAN: AJFPM7039R] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Thanjavur. Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Ms.Lavanya, C.A. Revenue by : Mr.SBR Kumar Laghimsetti, Addl.CIT Date of Hearing : 20.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 23.01.2026 O R D E R PER INTURI RAMA RAO, A.M : These five appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (herein after called CIT(A)’ in short], dated 24.09.2025 for the Assessment Years 2018-19 and 2020-21 respectively. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3510, 3511, 3512, 3513 & 3514/Chny/2025 Page - 2 - of 5 2.0 Since identical facts and issues are involved in five of these appeals, these appeals were heard together and disposed of vide this common order. 3.0 For the sake of convenience and clarity, the facts relevant to the appeal bearing ITA No.3510/Chny/2025 for the Assessment Year 2018- 19 are stated herein. 4.0 Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual. No regular return of income for the Assessment Year 2018- 19 was filed by the appellant under the provisions of u/s 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. However, based on the information that the appellant made cash deposits and withdrawals and made investment in equity shares, the AO formed an opinion that the income escaped assessment to tax. Accordingly, a notice u/s 148 was issued after complying with the procedure laid down u/s 148A of the Act. The appellant had not complied with the said notice u/s 148 nor complied the notice u/s 142(1). In circumstances, the AO proceeded with framing of the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s. section 144B of the Act vide order dated 30.01.2024 treating the cash deposits in the bank account and investment in equity as unexplained investment and made addition of Rs.2,40,00,744/-. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3510, 3511, 3512, 3513 & 3514/Chny/2025 Page - 3 - of 5 5.0 Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal “in limine” for non-prosecution. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 6.0 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on records. We find that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the appellant for non-prosecution without entering into the merits of the addition. The CIT(A) without dealing with the contentions of the appellant merely dismissed the appeal in limine for non-prosecution. As contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act the CIT(A) is required to frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon before passing the order. It is the settled position of law that the CIT(A), even while disposing of the appeal ex-parte, he is duty bound to dispose of the appeal on merits. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra 279 CTR 614. Therefore, in the light of the above legal position, we are of the considered view that the matter requires to be remanded to the file of the CIT(A) with the direction to dispose of the appeal de novo on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3510, 3511, 3512, 3513 & 3514/Chny/2025 Page - 4 - of 5 7.0 In the result, the appeal No. ITA-3510/Chny/202025 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. 8.0 Since the facts and issues involved in the present appeal of the assessee are identical, therefore, our decision in ITA No.3510/Chny/2025 for A.Y. 2018-19 shall apply mutatis mutandis to the appeal nos. in ITA No.3511/Chny/2025, ITA No.3512/Chny/2025 ITA No.3513/Chny/2025 for the Assessment Year 2018-19 and ITA No.3514/Chny/2025 for the Assessment Year 2020-21 also. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee in ITA Nos.3511,3512,3513/Chny/2025 for Assessment Year. 2018-19 and ITA No.3514/Chny/2025 for Assessment Year 2020-21 also stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 23rd , January-2026 at Chennai. Sd/- (SS VISWANETHRA RAVI) Judicial Member Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) Accountant Member Chennai, Dated 23rd , January-2026. KB/- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3510, 3511, 3512, 3513 & 3514/Chny/2025 Page - 5 - of 5 Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT - Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem. 4. DR 5. GF Printed from counselvise.com "