SRIMATHI,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 7(3), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 491/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 August 2026AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the assessee's personal circumstances and lack of proper representation, decided to grant another opportunity for the assessee to present her case. The appeals were remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual, did not file an income tax return. The AO reopened the assessment upon receiving information of cash deposits totaling Rs. 20,80,000/-. The assessee claimed the source was pledged gold and deposits from her father's business, but failed to provide sufficient details.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly considered the assessee's submissions regarding the source of cash deposits and whether the assessee should be granted a further opportunity to present her case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 271AAC(1),Section 148,Section 69A,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND MS. PADMAVATHY.S

For Respondent: Mr. Christopher Vasanth, Sr. A.R

आदेश / O R D E R

PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: These appeals by the assessee are against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short "CIT(A)") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") both dated 04.11.2025 for Assessment Years (AYs) 2018-19. The orders of the CIT(A) are emanating from the order passed by the A.O u/s. 147 and 271AAC(1) of the Act.

2.

The assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income for the assessment year under consideration. The AO received information that

ITA Nos.490 & 491/Chny/2026 Srimathi :- 2 -:

the assessee has cash deposits amounting to Rs.20,80,000/- in the bank account. Since the assessee did not file the return of income, the A.O reopened the assessment by issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The assessee submitted before the A.O that the source for cash deposit is the money received by pledging the personal gold ornaments which is deposited into the bank account and that the assessee has received small cash deposits from her father's business activities. The AO called on the assessee to furnish various details in support of the submissions. Since the assessee did not furnish any further details, the A.O made an addition of Rs. 20,80,000/- u/s. 69A of the Act. The A.O also treated the credits in the bank account as business receipts of the assessee and estimated the income at 6% on the credits to make an addition of Rs. 3,05,498/- as business income of the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). Before the CIT(A), the assessee submitted that since she is on the family way she could not furnish all the details in support of the source of cash deposit and the assessee furnished certain additional details before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) however did not accept the submissions of the assessee and proceeded to sustain the additions made by the A.O.

3.

We have heard the parties, and perused the material available on record. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee is a house wife and due to her family commitments could not represent the case properly before the lower authorities. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee had pledged the gold jewellery to support her father's business and that the assessee's father has been using the assessee's bank account to deposit certain money relating to the proprietary business of her father. The Ld. AR drew our attention to the details submitted before the

ITA Nos.490 & 491/Chny/2026 Srimathi :- 3 -:

CIT(A) (page 9 to 12 of CIT(A) order) to submit that the CIT(A) has not considered any of the submissions of the assessee and has proceeded to confirm the addition made by the A.O. The Ld. AR accordingly prayed for one more opportunity to represent the case properly before the CIT(A). Considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to assessee's case, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee in the interest of natural justice and fair play to represent the case properly by producing the required details. Accordingly, we remit the appeal back to the CIT(A) with a direction to call for necessary details and decide the issue in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to submit the necessary details as may be called for and cooperate with the appellate proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

4.

Since we have remitted the quantum appeal back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration the penalty levied u/s. 271AAC of the Act being consequential is also remitted back to CIT(A) to be decided along with the quantum appeal in accordance with law. Needless to say, the CIT(A) shall provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 05th day of August, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज� जॉज� के) (पदमावती यस) (Padmavathy.S) (George George K) उपा�� / Vice President लेखा सद�य लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य लेखा लेखा चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 05th August, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S Digitally signed by EJTADA DURGA EJTADA DURGA NARESH NARESH Date: 2026.08.10 11:49:13 +05'30'

ITA Nos.490 & 491/Chny/2026 Srimathi :- 4 -:

आदेश क� �ितिल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →