MUNIREDDY PRAKASHREDDY,KRISHNAGIRI V. ITO, WARD-1, HOSUR

ITA 450/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Munireddy Prakashreddy, the appellant, who contested an order from the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2012-13. The primary issue was the addition of Rs.23,08,000 as unexplained cash deposit by the AO due to non-compliance by the assessee. The assessee argued that additional evidences submitted were not considered by the CIT(A) because the assessee failed to mention Rule 46A, which was an inadvertent omission. The Tribunal found that the non-mention of Rule 46A should not be a ground for rejecting the evidences and decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order for a fresh examination of the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312865 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOWTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: G. AKASH
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘बी’न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री जॉजज जॉजज क े, उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री अमिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.450/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2012-13 Munireddy Prakashreddy, No.1/16, Madivalam, Nallur Post, Hosur, Krishnagiri Dist. Tamil Nadu-635 103, [PAN: AFBPP3725K] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Hosur. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Shri G.Akash, Advocate. प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Ms.Gowthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 23.04.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 30.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 / 1072191979(1) dated 15.01.2025 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2012-13. 2.0 At the outset, Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has violated its principles of natural justice by not considering the additional evidences filed before him. The Ld. AR informed that it ITA No. 450/Chny/2025 Page - 2 - of 3 could not make due compliance before the Ld. AO as result of which cash deposit of Rs.23,08,000/- was added in its case as unexplained. The Ld. AR argued that it filed additional evidences before the Ld.CIT(A), as evident from page 4 of the order, however, the Ld.CIT(A) proceeded to reject since the assessee had omitted to make an application under Rule 46A. It was submitted that non-indication of Rule 46A was an inadvertent omission on the part of the assessee. Accordingly request was made to set aside the matter to Ld.CIT(A) for reconsideration. 3.0 The Ld.DR relied upon the orders of lower authorities. 4.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. There is no denying the fact that the addition has been made by the Ld.AO for non-compliance by the assessee. It is also seen that the Ld.CIT(A) has merely rejected the additional evidences for non-reference to Rule 46A by the assessee. It is trite law that substance prevails over Form. Non-mention of Rule 46A cannot be a strong ground for rejection of evidences produced by the assessee. Be that as it may be in the interest of justice, we are of the view that the assessee deserves another opportunity of presenting its case. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld.CIT(A) and direct him to readjudicate the appeal after admitting the evidences produced before him. He shall be providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass a speaking order. He may obtain remand report from the Ld.AO if deemed ITA No. 450/Chny/2025 Page - 3 - of 3 necessary. The assessee shall comply all the statutory notices and any non-compliance would be viewed adversely. 5.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 30th , April -2025 at Chennai. Sd/- (जॉजज जॉजज क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाध्यक्ष / vice president Sd/- (अधिताभ शुक्ला) (AMITABH SHUKLA) लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 30th , April -2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Salem 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF "