THIRUVASAGAM SATHIYAMOORTHY,MADURAI V. ACIT, NCC, MADURAI, MADURAI

SA 131/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Thiruvasagam Sathiyamoorthy, the assessee, who filed a Stay Petition against an outstanding demand of Rs.2,03,35,012/- for the assessment year 2011-12. The demand arose from additions sustained by the CIT(A) concerning an unsecured loan of Rs. 2,58,56,000/- and a cash deposit of Rs,58,81,300/- in the assessee's bank account. The Assessing Officer (AO) had questioned the genuineness of these loans and the source of the cash deposits, despite the assessee's efforts to prove their authenticity. The Tribunal considered the arguments and the lack of opposition from the Revenue's side, leading to the decision to stay the demand.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 824471 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Stay Application
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 17-12-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R. ANITHA
• Assessee Lawyers: B. RAMAKRISHNAN; F.C.A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SA No.131/Chny/2025, Assessment Year: 2011-12 (ITA No.2954/Chny/2025, Assessment Year: 2011-12) Thiruvasagam Sathiyamoorthy, No.50, Kalai Nagar, 1st Main Road, Thapal Thanthi Nagar, Madurai, Tamil Nadu-625 017. [PAN: APPPS4213K] Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Non-Corporate Circle-3, Madurai. Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr.B.Ramakrishnan, F.C.A Revenue by : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT Date of Hearing : 19.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 30.12.2025 O R D E R PER INTURI RAMA RAO, A.M : The present Stay Petition is filed by the assessee seeking stay of outstanding demand of Rs.2,03,35,012/- for the assessment year 2011- 12 in ITA No.2954/Chny/2025. 2. The learned A.R submits that the demand in question had arisen on account of CIT(A) sustaining the addition made on account of unsecured loan of Rs. 2,58,56,000/- and cash deposit in the bank account of Rs,58,81,300/- and submits that the AO disputed the genuineness of the loans despite the fact that the petitioner had discharged the onus of proving the genuineness of the loans. Further, AO had not accepted the explanation of the petitioner that the cash Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.131/Chny/2025 Page - 2 - of 3 deposits were made out of the earlier withdrawals made in the bank accounts without giving a cogent reasons. Thus, submits that there was strong prima-facie case in favour of the petitioner. He further had already that the appellant already paid 20% of the disputed tax demand in question. The assessing officer already initiated coercive steps for recovery of the demand. Thus, he prayed that the demand in question may be stayed. On the other hand, the learned Sr.DR has not opposed the above submissions. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We are of considered opinion that in the light of above submissions which remain uncontroverted by the Ld.Sr.DR, it is a fit case to stay the disputed demand of Rs.2,03,35,012/- 4. Accordingly, the Stay Petition filed by the assessee stands allowed on the above terms as declared in the open court. Order pronounced on 30th , December-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- (GEORGE GEORGE K) Vice president Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) Accountant Member Chennai, Dated: 30th , December-2025. KB/- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.131/Chny/2025 Page - 3 - of 3 Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT - Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem. 4. DR 5. GF Printed from counselvise.com "