THIRUVAMBALAM,THANJAVUR V. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), TRICHY

ITA 518/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals filed by the assessee, Shri Thiruvambalam, against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The appeals were initially delayed by 174 days, but the Tribunal condoned the delay based on the reasons stated in the affidavit by the assessee. The primary issue arose from the reopening of the assessment by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, who added an unexplained investment of Rs.62,54,875 and levied a penalty of Rs.40,96,611 under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) had confirmed these additions and penalties ex-parte, which the assessee contested, citing non-receipt of notices. The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s orders and remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 126070 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANITHA
• Assessee Lawyers: N. ARJUN RAJ
• Keywords: Set aside; Unexplained investment; Reopening of assessment; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ \u000fा यपीठ, चे\u0014ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI \u0016ी मनु क ुमा र िग\u001bर ,\u000fा ियक सद एवं \u0016ी एस . आर . रघुना था , लेखा सद क े सम& BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.517 & 518/Chny/2025 (िनधा\u0005रण वष\u0005 / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri Thiruvambalam, #1, Vilar Road, First Floor, Opp. to PWD Office, Thanjavur-613 001. Vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Trichy. PAN : AAYPT-1543-R (अपीलाथ\u000f/Appellant) (\u0010\u0011यथ\u000f/Respondent) अपीलाथ\u000fक\u0014ओरसे/ Appellant by : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate \u0010\u0011यथ\u000fक\u0014ओरसे/Respondent by : Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT सुनवाईक\bतारीख/Date of hearing : 23.04.2025 घोषणाक\bतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 24.04.2025 आदेश आदेश आदेश आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM: The captioned appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate orders of the Ld. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC) Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 06.06.2024 and 21.06.2024 for Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The registry has noted delay of 174 days in filing the 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 follows:- The assessee is an individual filed his return of income on 22.07.2013 admitting total income of Rs.10,06,310/-. Notice 2 ITA No.517 & 518/Chny/2025 u/s.148 was issued on 28.08.2019 for reopening of assessment. The reason for reopening of assessment was assessee purchased a property jointly with his brother, but assessee failed to prove source of investment made in the property at T.Nagar, Chennai before the AO. Therefore, AO made addition of Rs.62,54,875/- towards unexplained investment and also levied penalty @ 100% amounting to Rs.40,96,611/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act vide order dated 05.02.2022. 4. Assessee further challenged the both ex-parte orders of assessment passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act before the ld.CIT(A) who proceeded ex-parte and confirmed the orders of the AO. Aggrieved, assessee is in further appeals before us. 5. Before us, the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has sent the notices, however, the assessee missed to receive notices hence the appeals were not prosecuted before the ld. CIT(A). 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 case before the CIT(A). The ld.DR stated that the 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 the both appeals. 3 ITA No.517 & 518/Chny/2025 6. Though we concur with the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice and grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We also find that assessee has not represented before the ld.CIT(A) despite notices for the reasons stated above. Surprisingly, we further note that while disposing of the appeal, the ld. CIT(A) held as ‘ appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed as not maintainable’. For not prosecuting appeal or for non-appearance by the assessee, an appeal cannot be held to be not maintainable. Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside and the both appeals are restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The ld. counsel, who appeared also assured the bench that he will ensure that the assessee will prosecute appeal proceedings diligently. 7. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 24th April, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (एस . आर . रघुनाथा) ( मनु क ुमार िग\u001bर ) ( S.R.Raghunatha ) ( Manu Kumar Giri) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सद\u0003य सद\u0003य सद\u0003य सद\u0003य / Accountant Member \u000fाियक सद / Judicial Member चे\u0019ई/Chennai, \u001bदनांक/Date: 24.04.2025 DS 4 ITA No.517 & 518/Chny/2025 आदेश क\u0007 \bितिलिप अ\u000eेिषत/Copy to: 1.Appellant 2.Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u0013/CIT Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय \bितिनिध/DR 5. गाड फाईल/GF. "