RAVI THIYAGARAJAN,ATTUR V. ITO WARD 1(6), SALEM

ITA 735/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Ravi Thiyagarajan against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which were related to the assessment year 2012-2013. The primary issues arose from the non-filing of income tax returns by the assessee and subsequent cash deposits identified by the tax authorities, which were treated as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The assessee's appeals were initially dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution as he failed to respond to multiple notices. The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to grant another opportunity for the assessee to present his case before the CIT(A).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 633582 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-06-2025
• 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: GOUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: A. TAMILAMUDHAN; C.A
• Keywords: Set aside; Bonafide belief; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘बी’ \u0010ा यपीठ, चे\u0016ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI मा ननीय \u001bी मनु क ुमा र िग र, \u0010ा ियक सद! एवं मा ननीय एस. आर. रघुना था , लेखा सद! क े सम) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI HON’BLE S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos.735 & 736/Chny/2025 िनधा <रण वष< /Assessment Years: 2012-13 Ravi Thiyagarajan, 52, Elango Street, Mullaivadi, Attur – 636 102. [PAN AIZPR 6848J] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(6), Salem. (अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant) (\b यथ\u0007/Respondent) अपीलाथG की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri A. Tamilamudhan, C.A IJथG की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 03.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 10.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member): Both the appeals by the assessee are arising out of the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)], Delhi dated 23.12.2024 in quantum proceedings and dated 07.02.2024 in penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(b) for the assessment year 2012- 2013. ITA Nos.735 & 736/Chny/2025 Ravi Thiyagarajan :- 2 -: 2. The registry has noted delay of 11 days in filing these appeals. Considering the reasons stated in the affidavit by the Assessee, we condone the delay and treat the reasons as ‘sufficient cause’ and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. Brief facts are as under: The assessee is an individual, did not file his return of income for the A.Y under consideration within the prescribed due dates of the Act. As such, the assessee was non-filer for the said AY. Later, as per the information available to the department, it was found that the assessee has deposited cash amounting to Rs.22,78,200/- in bank account maintained at IDBI bank. The AO has reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 26.03.2019, to file the ROI, however, the assessee did not comply to the said notice. Subsequently, notices u/s 142(1) of the Act and show cause notices were issued to the assessee calling for the requisite submissions. In response, the assessee filed certain submission before AO. After having considered the information available on record, the AO framed the impugned assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the act dated. 29.09.2021, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs. 24,35,870/-, While doing so, the AO ITA Nos.735 & 736/Chny/2025 Ravi Thiyagarajan :- 3 -: has made the addition of Rs. 22,78,200/- to the income of the assessee on account of cash deposits as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. Assessee further challenged the orders of assessment u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act before the ld.CIT(A) who reframed from adjudicating the on merits as the assess failed to appear and produce any substantial evidence. Hence, he dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution. Although the ld. CIT(A) issued three notices to the assessee, however, the assessee never responded to the same. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us. 4. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the CIT(A), within 12 days has sent the three notices however the same were not looked into by the assessee and as such the necessary compliance could not be made. He further contended that the assessee was in bonafide belief that the appeal proceedings were duly taken by the tax consultant. Therefore, he prayed that the assessee may be provided an adequate and proper representation time to file evidence and documents, if any, to substantiate his explanation regarding addition made u/s 69A of the Act. The Ld. DR stated that the ITA Nos.735 & 736/Chny/2025 Ravi Thiyagarajan :- 4 -: assessee is habitual defaulter in appearing before the appellate authority hence no lenient view is to be taken in these cases and prayed for dismissal of appeals. 5. We do concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however, keeping in mind the substantial justice and principle of natural justice, grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside and both the appeals are restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh appeal adjudication after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate his cases with all evidence and documents regarding addition made, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld.CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appeals adjudication as per law. The ld. counsel, who appeared has assured the bench that he will ensure that the assessee will prosecute his cases diligently before the appellate proceedings. If assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A), no lenient view will be taken. ITA Nos.735 & 736/Chny/2025 Ravi Thiyagarajan :- 5 -: 6. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 10th day of June, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R. Raghunatha) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य /Accountant Member (मनु क ुमार िग र) (Manu Kumar Giri) \u0010ाियक सद! / Judicial Member चे\u0013नई/Chennai, \u0016दनांक/Dated: 10th June, 2025. EDN/- आदेश क\u0019 \bितिल प अ े षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u000f/CIT, Salem 4. िवभागीय \bितिनिध/DR 5. गाड\u0018 फाईल/GF "