R1566 EVOOR PACCS LTD.,TRICHY vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), TRICHY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 813/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 April 2026AY 2019-204 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and, considering the lack of compliance by the assessee and in the interest of justice, remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. The assessee was directed to pay a cost of Rs. 10,000/-.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 12 days, which was condoned. The Assessing Officer made additions on account of unexplained money after the assessee failed to provide submissions. The CIT(A) also confirmed the AO's order due to non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the matter should be remanded to the AO for fresh consideration due to the assessee's non-compliance during the assessment and appeal proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

Hearing: 15.04.2026Pronounced: 30.04.2026

आदेश/O R D E R

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.11.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi, [‘ld.CIT(A)’ in short] for Assessment Year 2019- 20.

2 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.813/Chny/2026 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.813/Chny/2026 No.813/Chny/2026 No.813/Chny/2026

2.

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 12 days. The

assessee filed petition explaining the reasons to condone the said delay.

On perusal of the same and upon hearing both the parties, we find the

reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide which prevented the

assessee in filing the appeal in time. Thus, delay of 12 days condoned.

3.

At the outset, it is noted that the Assessing Officer [‘AO’ in short]

completed the assessment in absence of any submissions from assessee

and determined the income of the assessee at Rs.2,47,04,590/-, inter alia,

making addition on account of unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Income

Tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ in short] vide his order dated 28.02.2024 passed

u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of the Act. Before the ld.CIT(A) no compliance

was made which is evident from Para no. 8.1 of the impugned order.

4.

The ld.AR, Mr. S. Girish Kumar, Advocate, requested to remand the

matter to the file of the AO for a fresh consideration.

5.

The ld.DR, Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl.CIT, reported no

objection.

3 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.813/Chny/2026 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.813/Chny/2026 No.813/Chny/2026 No.813/Chny/2026

6.

On perusal of the assessment order in page no.5, it is clearly noted

that there was no compliance/response or explanation from the assessee

with reference to the cash deposits found in the bank account maintained

with Tiruchirapalli District Central Co-op Bank Ltd, thereby, the AO

treated the same as unexplained money of the assessee. Further, as

discussed above, ld.CIT(A) by recording his reasons in Para no. 9

confirmed the order of the AO for non-compliance. Thereby, considering

the submissions of the ld.AR and in the facts and circumstances of the

case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter

to the file of the AO on a condition of payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- in

favour of the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High

Court of Madras within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The

AO shall satisfy the payment of cost and proceed to complete the

assessment. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support

of its claim. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for

statistical purposes.

4 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.813/Chny/2026 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.813/Chny/2026 No.813/Chny/2026 No.813/Chny/2026

7.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 30th April, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated 30.04.2026 JPV/- आदेशकी'ितिलिपअ.ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ&/Appellant, 2.'(थ&/ Respondent, 3. आयकरआयु//CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय'ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड$ फाईल/GF.

PRASANNA Digitally signed by PRASANNA VANI JETTY VANI JETTY Date: 2026.05.04 10:46:45 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →