RAJU SHANTHI,SALEM V. ITO, WARD-1(2), SALEM

ITA 3161/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Raju Shanthi, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary issue arose from the assessee's failure to file a return of income despite depositing Rs.25,00,000 in cash during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued notices under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were not complied with, leading to an ex-parte order under section 144 assessing the total income at Rs.25,16,872. The assessee's subsequent appeal was also dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found that both the AO and the CIT(A) had not provided proper opportunities to the assessee, leading to the decision to remit the matter back to the AO for a fresh adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 107163 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: T.S. LAKSHMI VENKATARAMAN
• Section: 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ \u0011ा यपीठ, चे\u0016ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0019ी जॉज\u001c जॉज\u001c क े, उपा \u001e\u001f एवं \u0019ी एस. आर. रघुना था , लेखा सद+ क े सम\u001f BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3161/Chny/2024 िनधा \u001cरण वष\u001c /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Raju Shanthi, D. No.1A, Govindan St., Arisipalayam, Salem – 636 009. [PAN: AYJPS 3824R] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Salem. (अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant) (\b\tयथ\u0007/Respondent) अपीला थI की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, FCA KLथI की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवा ई की ता रीख/Date of Hearing : 18.02.2025 घोषणा की ता रीख /Date of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER S.R. RAGHUNATHA, A.M: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] for the assessment year 2017-18, vide order dated 29.01.2024. 2. There is a delay of 256 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons that the delay was primarily caused due to a real-time alert, ITA No.3161/Chny/2024 :- 2 -: which prevented timely action on the matter. 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. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs.25,00,000/- during demonetization period in his/her saving bank account maintained with State Bank of India, but has not filed return of income for the relevant A.Y. The AO therefore, issued notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act on 28.11.2017 calling for return of income. However, the assessee neither filed return of income in response to notice nor complied with notices issued during assessment proceeding. The A.O therefore passed ex-parte order u/s. 144 of the Act dated 26.09.2019 taking entire cash deposits made into his/her bank account assessing total income of Rs.25,16,872/-. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has issued various notices, but there was no compliances to the notices and therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) also dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte by the order dated 29.01.2024. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for setting aside the order of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication, since the case was ITA No.3161/Chny/2024 :- 3 -: not prosecuted before the Assessing Officer and the same has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) without any discussion. 5. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities and prayed for confirming the impugned order. 6. We have heard both the parties and gone through the order of the lower authorities below. It is noted that the AO and that of the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the orders without giving proper opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, to meet the ends of justice by providing one more opportunity to the assessee, we remit the matter back to the file of the AO for denovo adjudication. We also direct the assessee to appear before the AO and at liberty to submit the relevant details before the AO for adjudication of the case. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 21st February, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज\u001c जॉज\u001c क े) (George George K) उपा\u001e\u001f / Vice President (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R. Raghunatha) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य /Accountant Member चे\u0013नई/Chennai, \u0016दनांक/Dated: 21st February, 2025. EDN/- ITA No.3161/Chny/2024 :- 4 -: आदेश क\u0019 \bितिल\u001cप अ\u001dे\u001cषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant 2. \b\tथ\u0007/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u000f/CIT, Chennai 4. िवभागीय \bितिनिध/DR 5. गाड\u0018 फाईल/GF "