SANKAR RUDRASENAN ,NAMAKKAL V. ITO, WARD-2, NAMAKKAL

ITA 2894/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sankar Rudrasenan, who appealed against the orders of the Income Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding the assessment of undisclosed income and a penalty imposed for the assessment year 2012-13. The Assessing Officer had added a substantial amount as undisclosed income based on cash deposits and imposed a penalty, which was upheld by the CIT(A). However, due to non-participation and procedural delays, the Tribunal provided a new opportunity for the assessee to contest the assessments and penalties.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 825034 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 22-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K. ILAIYARAJA
• Assessee Lawyers: T.S. LAKSHMI VENKATRAMAN
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ ा यपीठ, चे\u0012ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI \u0001ी एबी ट\u0006 वक , या यक सद\u0010य एवं \u0001ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद\u0010य क े सम BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./ITA Nos.2894 & 2895/CHNY/2025 ( नधा रण वष / Assessment Year:2012-13) Sankar Rudrasenan, 38, B/2 C.H.B Colony, Velur Road, Tiruchengode Namakkal - 637 211. vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Namakkal. [PAN:ALXPR-7288-M] (अपीलाथ#/Appellant) ($%यथ#/Respondent) अपीलाथ# क& ओर से/Appellant by : Mr. T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, FCA (Virtual). $%यथ# क& ओर से/Respondent by : Mr. K. Ilaiyaraja, Addl. CIT. सुनवाई क& तार\u0006ख/Date of Hearing : 17.12.2025 घोषणा क& तार\u0006ख/Date of Pronouncement : 29.12.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER S.R.RAGHUNATHA, AM: These appeals of the assessee are filed against the separate orders of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short ‘ld.CIT(A)’) for the assessment year 2012-13, vide both the orders dated 23.06.2025 against the assessment order passed by the AO, NFAC, Delhi, u/s.147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short Printed from counselvise.com :-2-: ITA Nos. 2894 & 2895/Chny/2025 ‘the Act’) dated 25.09.2021 and the penalty order u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act dated 23.12.2021 respectively. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and has filed his return of income on 04.01.2023 for the AY 2012-13 by admitting total income of Rs.3,14,000/-. Based on the information available with the department, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee made cash deposits to the tune of Rs.58,19,000/- into his bank account. The AO issued statutory notices to the assessee and called for details, but the assessee failed to respond the any of the notices. The AO completed the assessment u/s.147 r.w.s 144B of the Act dated 25.09.2021 after making addition of cash deposit of Rs.58,19,000/- as undisclosed income u/s.68 of the Act and arriving total income of Rs.61,33,200/-. 3. Further, the AO imposed a penalty of Rs.17,28,897/- being 100% of the tax sought to be evaded on the concealed income by passing a penalty order u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act dated 23.12.2021. 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed two separate appeals before the ld. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi. The ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeals in limine without condoning the delay in filing the quantum appeal with a delay of 3 months and 2 days and penalty appeal with a delay of 4 days, stating that the assessee has stated as ‘NO’ against the question relating to delayed filing in Form – 35. Further, the ld.CIT(A) has provided thirteen opportunities in both the appeals, to the assessee to appear for hearings as detailed in paragraph 7 of the ld.CIT(A) order to support the appeal of the assessee. However, the assessee chose to be silent and did not respond to any of the notices and hence, the ld.CIT(A) passed separate orders dated 23.06.2025 by confirming the orders of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the impugned orders of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. Printed from counselvise.com :-3-: ITA Nos. 2894 & 2895/Chny/2025 5. The ld.AR submitted that the assessee has maintained proper books of accounts and has also filed Tax Audit Report in Form 3CB-3CD. The above deposits made are properly accounted and explained by way of books of account maintained by the assessee and lower authorities are not justified in assessing the entire deposits as income and delay has been covered by the Covid Pandemic. In view of the above, the ld.AR prayed to set aside the order of ld.CIT(A) and remit the issues to the file of Assessing Officer. Further, ld.AR assured the bench that the ld.AR will represent on behalf of the assessee before the AO to complete the assessment effectively. 6. Per contra, the ld.DR submitted that both the Assessing Officer and the ld.CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunity to appear before them. However, the assessee has been negligent in responding to the statutory notices and hence, prayed for confirming the order of the ld.CIT(A). 7. We have heard the rival parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We note that the AO has passed order by considering the submissions made by the assessee along with the information available with the department and the same has been dismissed by the ld.CIT(A), NFAC due to non-participation. Since the assessee has failed to participate before the Assessing Officer as well as the ld.CIT(A), we levy the cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble High Court of Madras within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and the assessee shall satisfy the payment of cost before the authorities. 8. Therefore, in the present facts and circumstances of the case and to meet the ends of justice, we deem it fit to provide one more opportunity for the assessee. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A) as the assessee had filed the condonation of delay in his form 35 itself and Printed from counselvise.com :-4-: ITA Nos. 2894 & 2895/Chny/2025 hence, we set aside the order of the ld.CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of AO to frame the denovo assessment in accordance to law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Needless to say, assessee to be diligent and file written submissions and relevant documents if advised so. 9. Since the order in quantum appeal in ITA No.2894/Chny/2025 (supra) has already been set aside and remitted back to the AO, the consequential penalty order passed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act dated 23.12.2021, is likewise hereby set aside and remitted back to AO to decide the issue along with the quantum assessment. 10. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the court on 29th December, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (एबी टी वक\u0017 ) (ABY T VARKEY) ाियक सद\u001a/Judicial Member (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R.RAGHUNATHA) लेखासद\u001a/Accountant Member चे\u0012ई/Chennai, िदनांक/Dated, the 29th December, 2025 jk आदेश की \u0007ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\u0017/Appellant 2. \"#थ\u0017/Respondent Printed from counselvise.com :-5-: ITA Nos. 2894 & 2895/Chny/2025 3.आयकर आयु$/CIT– Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem 4. िवभागीय \"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड) फाईल/GF Printed from counselvise.com "