Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai

Karupanna Gounder Natarajan,Namakkal vs Ito, Ward-2,, Namakkal on 21 February, 2025

                  आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, 'बी'            ायपीठ, चे ई।
               IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                         'B' BENCH: CHENNAI

         ी जॉज जॉज के, उपा        एवं   ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखासद+ के सम
        BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND
            SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

                   आयकर अपील सं ./ITA No.3160/Chny/2024
                    िनधारण वष /Assessment Year: 2017-18

Karupanna Gounder Natarajan,                  The Income Tax Officer,
No.515/W, Jangamanaickanpatty,            Vs. Ward-2,
Villiplayam Post,                             Namakkal.
Paramathi Velur,
Namakkal - 637 207.
[PAN: AEBPN 9177Q]

(अपीलाथ /Appellant)                            (   यथ /Respondent)

अपीलाथI की ओर से/ Appellant by             :   Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, FCA
KLथI की ओर से /Respondent by               :   Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing            :   18.02.2025
घोषणाकी तारीख /Date of Pronouncement       :   21.02.2025

                                  आदे श / O R D E R

PER S.R. RAGHUNATHA, A.M :

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [hereinafter "CIT(A)"] for the assessment year 2017-18, vide order dated 06.06.2024.

2. There is a delay of 103 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the ITA No.3160/Chny/2024 :- 2 -:

reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, engaged in the Poultry Farm business. The assessee has filed return of income on 31.10.2017, admitting total income of Rs. 4,98,910/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the A.O found that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs.61,02,210/- in his savings bank account maintained with Canara Bank, Namakkal during demonetization period. The A.O therefore issued a notice to the assessee u/s. 148 of the Act. However, the assessee did not comply with the notices issued during the assessment proceedings. Upon perusal of bank statement, the A.O found that the assessee had deposited SBN notes of Rs. 8,77,500/- up to 11.11.2016 is reasonable which correlated with the cash balance of the assessee as on 07.11.2016. However, the assessee had deposited the SBN notes of Rs.15,02,500/- after 11.11.2016, which was not acceptable. The AO, therefore, passed an ex-parte order dated 29.09.2021 by making an addition of Rs. 15,02,500/- u/s. 69A of the Act, assessing total income of Rs. 20,01,410/-. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal ITA No.3160/Chny/2024 :- 3 -:

before the Ld. CIT(A). On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) issued notices from 16.03.2024 to 27.05.2024, but there was no compliance for the notices by the assessee. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) also dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte by passing an order dated 06.06.2024.
4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for setting aside the order of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication, since the case was not prosecuted before the Assessing Officer and the same has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) without any discussion.
5. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities and prayed for confirming the impugned order.
6. We have heard both the parties and gone through the order of the lower authorities below. It is noted that the AO and that of the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the orders without giving proper opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, to meet the ends of justice by providing one more opportunity to the assessee, we remit the matter back to the file of the AO for denovo adjudication. We also direct the assessee to appear before the AO and at liberty to submit the relevant details before the AO for adjudication of the case.
ITA No.3160/Chny/2024

:- 4 -:

7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
                    Order pronounced on 21st        February, 2025.


                   Sd/-                                          Sd/-
               (जॉज जॉज के)                                (एस. आर. रघुनाथा)
            (George George K)                             (S.R. Raghunatha)
          उपा    / Vice President                   लेखा सद य /Accountant Member
चे नई/Chennai, दनांक/Dated:      21st   February, 2025.
EDN/-

आदे श क   ितिल प अ े षत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ /Appellant

2.   थ /Respondent
3. आयकर आयु      /CIT, Chennai

4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR
5. गाड फाईल/GF