SITHI KATHEJA BEEVI,CHENNAI V. ITO, NCW-3(3), CHENNAI

ITA 2781/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sithi Katheeja Beevi against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which dismissed her appeal ex parte for want of prosecution regarding the assessment year 2017-18. The primary issue was the justification of the CIT(A) in passing an ex parte order. The Assessing Officer had earlier treated a significant portion of the assessee's cash deposits as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to respond to notices was due to the death of her husband during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was beyond her control.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 825015 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 09-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LATCHANA
• Assessee Lawyers: S. VELPANDIAR
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं सुŵी एस.पȧावती,, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Ms. S. Padmavathy, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2781/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sithi Katheeja Beevi, No. 6, Ground Floor, Crown Court, 128, Cathedral Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai 600 086. [PAN: AAKPK5316M] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 3(3), Chennai. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri S. Velpandiar, Advocate ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Latchana, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 17.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2025 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 27.02.2025 of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 162 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, in Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2781/Chny/25 2 the interest of justice, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee raised 4 grounds of appeal amongst which, the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in passing exparte order and dismissing the appeal. 4. The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee made cash deposits of ₹.15,10,000/- in Specified Bank Notes (SBN) in Bank of Baroda, Nungambakkam Branch on 15.11.2016 and the assessee was asked to explain the source for the same. The explanations offered by the assessee are reproduced at pages 2 & 3 of the assessment order. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] dated 10.12.2019 treating the cash deposits of ₹.13,16,500/- as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and added to the total income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal exparte of the assessee for want of prosecution. 5. The ld. AR Shri S. Velpandiar, Advocate submits that the tax affairs of the assessee were looked after by her husband, who passed away on 03.10.2021 during 2nd wave of Covid-19 and the assessee was not aware Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2781/Chny/25 3 of the hearing notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). He submits that non- response to the hearing notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) is neither wilful nor wanton, but, beyond the control of the assessee. The ld. AR prayed for one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the claim before the ld. CIT(A). 6. The ld. DR Ms. Latchana, JCIT drew our attention to para 7 of the impugned order and submits that the assessee was afforded sufficient opportunities, but, there was no compliance from the assessee. 7. Heard both the parties and perused the material on record. We note that the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act. On perusal of the appellate order, we note that there was no assistance from the assessee against the hearing notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). Taking into consideration of the submissions of the ld. AR and the ld. DR and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to afford one more opportunity and remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh after considering the written submissions/ documentary evidences as may be filed by the assessee to substantiate the claim. In case, if the assessee fails to appear before the ld. CIT(A), it is left open to the ld. CIT(A) to pass order in accordance with law. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2781/Chny/25 4 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 31st December, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (S. PADMAVATHY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 31.12.2025 Vm/- 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 "