GANGANDASARATHAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-15(1), CHENNAI

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an Individual deriving income under head “Business”. The Return of Income for the Assessment Year 2014-15 was filed on 16.07.2014 disclosing a total income of Rs.3,56,500/-. Against the said Return of Income, the assessment was completed by the ITO, NCW-15(1), Chennai vide order dated 28.07.2016 passed u/s.143(3) of the Act at a total income of Rs.54,46,500/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made addition of cash deposits of Rs.50,90,000/- in the bank account for the failure of the appellant to explain the sources of the deposits.

Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the appellant preferred an appeal before ld.CIT(A), who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal for non- prosecution.

Being aggrieved by the order of ld.CIT(A), the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. The learned Counsel submits that the appellant had filed a detailed submission before the ld.CIT(A) explaining the sources for cash deposits and also filed an application seeking admission of the additional evidence before the ld.CIT(A). Thus, he submits that the ld.CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution.

We heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. At the outset, we find that the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. The contention of the appellant that the appellant filed written submission explaining the source of the cash deposits during the course of proceedings before the ld.CIT(A) remain uncontroverted by the learned Sr.DR. Similarly, the appellant also stated that it also filed an application under 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 seeking to admit the additional evidence in support sources of the cash deposits. These contentions of the appellant remains uncontroverted by the learned Sr.DR. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the matter requires remand to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication of the issues in appeal on merits after affording an opportunity of being heard to the appellant.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30th June, 2026. (SS VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Chennai; िदनांक / Dated : 30th June, 2026 SGR, Sr.PS आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ" / The Appellant.