THAMBU SAMI, REP. BY L/H MR. SENTHIL KUMAR,CUDDALORE V. ITO, WARD-2., CUDDALORE

ITA 986/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Thambu Sami, represented by his legal heir Mr. Senthil Kumar, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The appeal was related to an addition of Rs.2,00,00,000 as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, due to a cash deposit of the same amount in the assessee's bank account. The AO had reopened the case after obtaining prior approval and issued a notice under section 148. The assessee, after the notice, filed his return declaring a significantly lower income. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on merits, leading to the current appeal. The tribunal noted procedural lapses, including the assessment being completed on a deceased person and lack of proper queries regarding the claim of capital gain exemptions during the assessment proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775776 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S. SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice; Deduction for capital gain

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ \u0011ा यपीठ, चे\u0016ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI मा ननीय \u001bी मनु क ुमा र िग र, \u0011ा ियक सद एवं मा ननीय अिमता भ शु'ा , लेखा सद क े सम) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI HON’BLE AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.986/Chny/2025 & C.O No.68/Chny/2025 (Arises in ITA No.986/Chny/2025) िनधा ,रण वष, /Assessment Year: 2011-12 Thambu Sami, Represented by Legal Heir Mr. Senthil Kumar, 32, Nadu Street, Villiyanallur, Chidambaram, Cuddalore – 608 501. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Cuddadlore. [PAN: AMGPT 6351D] (अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant) (\b यथ\u0007/Respondent/Cross Objector) अपीलाथ/ की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate. 12थ/ की ओर से /Respondent/Cross Objector by : Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 10.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 10.09.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH: The appeal being ITA No.986/Chny/2025 is filed by the assessee, whereas C.O No.68/Chny/2025 is filed by the Revenue are directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 986/Chny/2025 & C.O No.68/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: (Appeals) (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 11.10.2023 for Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The registry has noted delay of 460 days in filing the appeal and delay of 73 days in filing Cross Objection (‘CO’ in short). Considering the reasons stated in the affidavit by the assessee and Revenue, we condone the respective delays and treat the reasons as ‘sufficient cause’ and admit the appeal and CO for adjudication. 3. Brief facts are as under: The assassin did not file his return of income for the AY 2011-12. The AO had information that the assessee had deposited an amount of Rs.2,00,00,000/- in the form of cash deposit in his bank account maintained with ICICI Bank, Puducherry branch during FY 2010-11. The case was reopened after obtaining prior approval from the Pr.CIT Puducherry and notice u/s.148 of the act was issued on 22.03.2018. In response to the notice u/s.148, the assessee has filed his ITR on 15.05.2019 declaring total income of Rs.59,403/-. During the assessment proceedings, it has been observed from the bank account of the assessee that the assessee has made cash deposit amounting to Rs.2,00,00,000/- on 29.09.2010. The assessee has claimed that he Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 986/Chny/2025 & C.O No.68/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: has sold his agricultural land for total consideration of Rs.2,90,40,000/- out of which Rs.2,00,00,000/- received in cash and Rs.90,40,000/- received through DD. The assessment u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act was completed on 29.11.2019 at total income of Rs.2,00,59,403/- after making an addition of Rs.2,00,00,000/- on account of cash deposit as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act. Assessee further challenged the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act before the ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal on merits. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us. 4. Before us, the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the assessee who was 94 years old, died during the appellate proceedings and ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on dead person. He further contended that in the factual matrix of the case, the matter may be remanded back to the AO for filling of proper evidence/documents if any, to substantiate his explanation regarding cash deposits in ICICI Bank A/c and for denovo assessment. The ld. Sr.DR vehemently objected to the prayer of the ld.counsel for the assessee. She further Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 986/Chny/2025 & C.O No.68/Chny/2025 :- 4 -: contended that the Assessment Year in question is concerned with AY 2011-12 and the documents may not be available being old case. Hence no lenient view is to be taken in this case and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 5. Though we concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however, keeping in mind the substantial cause and principle of natural justice, we grant one opportunity of hearing to the assessee before the AO. We also find that during the assessment proceedings, the AO has not put any query to the assessee regarding the claim of capital gain exemptions. We feel that in this peculiar case, the assessee is required proper opportunity to prove the source for the cash deposits. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of AO for denovo assessment on legal heirs of the assessee after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the legal heirs. The assessee is directed to substantiate his case with all evidence and documents regarding cash deposits in ICICI bank account, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which AO shall be at liberty to proceed with the denovo assessment as per law. The ld. counsel, who appeared also assured the bench that he will ensure that Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 986/Chny/2025 & C.O No.68/Chny/2025 :- 5 -: he and LRs of the assessee will prosecute this case diligently before the AO. All the legal issues, if any, are kept open. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose whereas the Cross objection of the revenue is become infructuous. Order pronounced on 10th September, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (अिमताभ शु'ा) (Amitabh Shukla) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य /Accountant Member (मनु क ुमार िग र) (Manu Kumar Giri) \u0011ाियक सद / Judicial Member चे\u0003ई Chennai: िदनांक Dated : 10/09/2025 EDN, Sr. P.S आदेश क\u0013 \bितिल\u0016प अ\u0017े\u0016षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\u0010/Appellant 2. \u0011\u0012थ\u0010/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु\u0017/CIT, Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem. 4. िवभागीय\u0011ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड फाईल/GF Printed from counselvise.com "