REINER LOUIS PREMALATHA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-19(4), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2935/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 May 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that while invoices and debtor details were submitted, ledger copies and confirmations were missing. To ensure natural justice, the appeal was remitted back to the AO for fresh examination.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited cash during demonetization, claiming it was from debtors. The Assessing Officer (AO) added it as unexplained income. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal and enhanced the addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the cash deposits during demonetization were adequately substantiated by the assessee, and if not, whether the addition made by the AO and enhanced by the CIT(A) was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40A(3)

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: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT

आदेश / O R D E R

PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is against the order 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") dated 27.08.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18.

2.

The assessee is an individual and filed the return of income for AY 2017-18 on 30.10.2017 admitting a total income of Rs.13,20,720/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the statutory notices were duly served on the

ITA No.2935/Chny/2025 Reiner Louis Premalatha :- 2 -:

assessee. The A.O noticed from the books of accounts that the assessee has deposited cash during the year under consideration and called on the assessee to explain the source for the same. The assessee submitted that the cash is sourced from collection from debtors. The A.O after considering the submissions of the assessee held that the assessee has not properly discharged the onus of substantiating the claim that the cash is received from the debtors during the demonetization period. Accordingly, the A.O made an addition of Rs.32,00,000/- as unexplained income in the hands of the assessee. Before the CIT(A), the assessee submitted that deposit during the demonetization period is out of the cash sales made. The assessee further submitted that she has received cash from customers in her capacity as cargo agent and that the impugned amount is already declared revenue in the hands of the assessee. The CIT(A) however dismissed the appeal stating that the assessee did not furnish the ledger copies, confirmations from debtors and other relevant documentary evidences. The CIT(A) enhanced the addition to the tune of Rs.4,66,218/- by making a disallowance u/s. 40A(3) of the Act. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A).

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 furnished all the relevant details which have not considered. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee in the details submitted with regard to cash deposit during the demonetization period has provided the details along with the addresses of the parties from whom the cash was received by the assessee. The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, vehemently argued that the assessee did not provide the ledger copy and confirmations failing which the lower authorities have correctly

ITA No.2935/Chny/2025 Reiner Louis Premalatha :- 3 -:

made the addition. From the perusal of the facts and the materials on record, we notice that though the assessee has submitted details such as invoices and the details of the person from whom the cash was received by the assessee. However, we further notice that the assessee did not submit the confirmations or the ledger copies of the debtors from whom the assessee is claiming to have received the impugned cash therefore in the interest of natural justice and fair play, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee to submit the relevant details such as ledger, confirmations from the debtors etc. Accordingly, we remit the appeal back to the A.O to examine the impugned issue afresh calling for relevant details as may be required to decide the case in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to furnish the details as may be called for and cooperate with the assessment proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 14th day of May, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज� जॉज� के) (पदमावती यस) (Padmavathy.S) (George George K) उपा�� / Vice President लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 14th May, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S

ITA No.2935/Chny/2025 Reiner Louis Premalatha :- 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 EJTADA Digitally signed by EJTADA DURGA DURGA NARESH Date: 2026.06.01 NARESH 12:41:06 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 40A(3)

All 3,278 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40A(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →