THIPPANAYEKAR NAGAMALAI,NAMAKKAL V. ITO, WARD-2, NAMAKKAL

ITA 3067/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Thippanayekar Nagamalai, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi, which confirmed an addition of Rs. 25,05,000 on account of cash deposits in the assessee's bank account for the assessment year 2010-11. The appeal was initially delayed due to the assessee's illiteracy and reliance on a Chartered Accountant, who failed to comply with timely submissions. The Tribunal found that both lower authorities had passed ex-parte orders without sufficient opportunity for the assessee to be heard. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to set aside the lower authorities' orders and remand the matter back to the assessing officer for a fresh examination, emphasizing the need for a speaking order and proper adherence to procedural fairness.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470331 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Other Referred Cases: TIN box 249 ITR 216
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R. RAGHUPATHY
• Assessee Lawyers: GIRISH KUMAR
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

"Page - 1 - of 5 आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘‘ए’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI श्री एबी टी. वर्की, न्यायिर्क सदस्य एवं श्री अयिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 3067/Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2010-11 Thippanayekar Nagamalai, No.44, Pullapanaikanoor, Chellappampatti, Namakkal Tamil Nadu-637 019. [PAN: AMWPN7181M] The Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Namakkal. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr. Girish Kumar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. CIT सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18.02.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065533322(1) dated 11.06.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2010-11. Through the aforesaid appeal the assessee has challenged order u/s 250 dated 11.06.2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi. ITA No.3067/Chny/2024 Page - 2 - of 5 2.0 It has been noted that there is a delay of 93 days in the appeal, in filing before the tribunal. In its affidavit the assesse has pleaded that the assesse is illiterate person working in villages and not conversant with tax procedures and electronic working thus he was totally dependent upon his Chattered Accountant. It was submitted that the said Chattered Accountant failed in making timely compliances. All these activities contributed to the delay which was neither willful nor wanton. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee assured that there will not be case of any non-compliance now. We have considered the justification put forth by the assesse and we are satisfied with their adequacy. We are also conscious of the fact that no litigant gains by intentionally delaying its own matters. The Ld. DR did not pose any serious objections to the delay however contended that the cost be imposed upon the assessee for wasting the precious time of the judicial authorities. Accordingly, we hereby condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate this appeal. 3.0 At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that both the lower authorities the Ld.AO as well as Ld. CIT(A) has passed ex- parte orders in case of the assessee. It was submitted that the only issue under consideration is an addition of Rs.25,05,000/- on account of cash deposits in the bank account. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld.First Appellate Authority has also confirmed the ITA No.3067/Chny/2024 Page - 3 - of 5 addition by passing an ex-parte order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. It was accordingly pleaded that in the interest of justice the matter may be restored back to the file of Ld.AO for readjudication. The Ld. Counsel assured that full compliance would now be made to the statutory notices. The Ld. DR would like to make us believe on the correctness of the order of lower authorities. It was however simultaneously pleaded that costs be imposed upon the appellant for wasting the time of the Bench. 4.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. As per facts recorded by the Ld. AO in his order, he had given opportunities to the assessee for filing the required details which were not satisfactorily filed by the assessee leading to his making the impugned addition. We have however noted that the order passed by the Ld. AO is not a speaking order and clear facts have not been brought on records before making the impugned addition. There are also indications of no enquiries conducted by the Ld.AO. Before the Ld.First Appellate Authority also the conduct of the assessee was far from satisfactory as far as compliance to statutory notices are concerned leading to dismissal of the appeal for want of adequate persecution by the assessee. ITA No.3067/Chny/2024 Page - 4 - of 5 4.1 We have thus noted that inadequate submission of details and evidences, before the lower authorities qua sources of deposits in assessee’s bank account lies at the core of the controversy. We are therefore of the view that ends of justice would be met if the assessee is given one last opportunity to present its case and file all supporting evidences before the Ld.AO. The assessing officer is the primary authority under the income tax act to be examine facts of a case in the light of available evidences before determining correct taxable income of a tax payer. We therefore set aside the order of lower authorities on this issue and we direct the Ld. AO to readjudicate the matter de novo by examining the matter afresh in accordance with law and by passing a speaking order. Reliance in this regard is placed upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TIN box 249 ITR 216. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. AO. Any non-compliance on the part of the assesse can be adversely viewed. We however find force in the argument of the Ld. DR that assessee’s repeated non-compliance has indeed caused loss of precious time of the statutory authorities. Consequently, the decision to remit the matter to the Ld. AO is however subject to payment of cost of Rs.3,000/- by the assessee to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High ITA No.3067/Chny/2024 Page - 5 - of 5 Court of Madras within 30 days of the receipt of this order. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assesse on this issue are allowed for statistical purposes. 6.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 21st , February-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- ( एबी टी. वकी) (ABY T VARKEY) न्यानयक सदस्य / Judicial Member Sd/- (अयिताभ शुक्ला) (AMITABH SHUKLA) लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, नदिांक/Dated: 21st , February-2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/Copy to: 1. अपीलार्थी/Assessee: 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Revenue 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Salem 4. नवभागीय प्रनतनिनर्/DR 5. गार्ा फाईल/GF "