RAJASEKAR DHANAPAL,KANCHEEPURAM V. ITO, NCW-22(1), TAMBARAM

ITA 2299/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Rajasekar Dhanapal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention was the alleged non-receipt of the impugned order and notices by the assessee, which led to a delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal noted that the Revenue did not provide evidence of service of the notice or the order, and thus, it was held that there was no delay in filing the appeal. The Assessing Officer had initially made an addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act regarding unexplained money, which was upheld by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance by the assessee in the first appellate proceedings. The Tribunal decided to remand the matter for fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 782029 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 20-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C.P. SOLOMON
• Assessee Lawyers: S. GIRISH KUMAR
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘‘सी’’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी ऐम. बालगनेश, लेखा सद˟ एवं ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2299/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Rajasekar Dhanapal, No. 5/45, D Block, TNHB Quarters, Kancheepuram 631 501 Currently residing at 30 N Gould St Ste R Sheridan WY 82801. [PAN: AYRPR1457M] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 22(1), Tambaram. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri S. Girish Kumar, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 23.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 28.10.2025 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 28.06.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The Registry found this appeal is filed with a delay of 354 days. The ld. AR submits there was no communication from first appellate authority about the passing of impugned order nor service of the order. The ld. AR Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2299/Chny/25 2 drew our attention to page 2 of the paper book and argued that no notice nor the impugned order served to the said e-mail ID. Further, he drew our attention page 8, 10, 11 & 12 and submits though proper e-mail ID given in Form 35and in the return of income, no such correspondence delivered to the assessee on the said e-mail ID. The assessee came to knowledge of the impugned order only in the penalty proceedings where the respondent- Revenue brought to the notice about passing of impugned order and immediately, the assessee filed the present appeal. He argued that there is no delay at all in filing the present appeal and drew our attention to Col. No.11 of Form 36. 3. The ld. DR submits that the notice was served on the assessee by affixture and the assessee is in the knowledge of first appellate authority passing the impugned order. 4. Having heard both the parties and on perusal of paper book containing pages 1 to 12, it is noted that the Revenue did not bring on record any evidence showing the service of notice nor the impugned order and accordingly, in the absence of any such evidence, we hold that there is no delay. 5. At the outset, we note that the Assessing Officer concluded the assessment under section 144 of the Act, inter alia, making addition under Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2299/Chny/25 3 section 69A of the Act on account of unexplained money in the absence of any evidence in support of the contention of the assessee, which is clear from para 2 to 5 of the assessment order. Further, it is clear from para 3.1 to 3.4 of the impugned order that the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer for non-compliance of notices issued in the first appellate proceedings. It is not disputed by the ld. DR. Therefore, considering the submissions of the ld. AR and ld. DR and in the interest of justice, we deem it to remand the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The assessee shall cooperate in the assessment proceedings and the Assessing Officer shall pass order in accordance with the law. The assessee is at liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of his contentions. 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 28th October, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (M. BALAGANESH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 28.10.2025 Vm/- Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2299/Chny/25 4 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 "