SIVANESAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-7(3), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2429/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 July 2026AY 2020-214 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that both the AO and CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders due to the assessee's failure to provide evidence and participate. To meet the ends of justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back to the AO for de novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file a return of income for AY 2020-21. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the case under Section 147 based on information about cash deposits and credit card payments, and made additions as unexplained money and expenditure. The assessee did not respond to notices from the AO and the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the reassessment order passed ex-parte without proper compliance and the CIT(A)'s dismissal of the appeal for lack of evidence were justified, and if the matter should be remanded for a fresh assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 148,Section 69A,Section 69C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 17.06.2026Pronounced: 02.07.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI श्री जॉजज जॉजज के, उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2429/Chny/2026 ननिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Sivanesan, The Income Tax Officer, 82/1, Kamarajar Nagar, vs. Non-Corporate Ward 7(3) Main Road, Ambathur, Chennai. Chennai – 600 071. [PAN: CEYPS-9538-D] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/Appellant by : Ms. Kousalya Lakshmanan, CA प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri. Manjunath H.S, Addl.CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 17.06.2026 घोर्णा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 02.07.2026 आदेश /O R D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, AM :

The present appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 17.02.2026 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”], arising from the assessment order dated 23.03.2025 Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 7(3), Chennai [hereinafter referred to as “the AO”], u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2020-21.

:-2-: ITA. No:2429/Chny/2026 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and did not file his return of income for AY 2020-21. As per the information available with the department, the AO found that the assessee has made cash deposits to the tune of Rs.73,74,300/- and payment made for credit cards to the tune of Rs.17,60,065/- during the assessment year. Hence, the case was re-opened u/s.147 of the Act, accordingly, a notice u/s.148 of the Act issued to the assessee. In response, the assessee has failed to file his return of income for the A.Y 2020-21. Further, the AO issued statutory notices to the assessee and by calling for details. The assessee chose to be silent and did not respond to any of the notices. Hence, the AO completed the reassessment by passing an exparte order u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Act dated 23.03.2025 by making an addition of Rs.73,74,300/- as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act and amount of Rs.17,60,065/- as unexplained expenditure u/s.69C of the Act and by arriving a total income of Rs.91,34,365/-.

3.

Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) on 26.04.2025.

4.

At the outset, we observed that ld.CIT(A) has issued various notices to the assessee to appear for hearings as detailed in paragraph 4 of the ld.CIT(A) order to support the appeal of the assessee. In response, the assessee has submitted the reply without any documentary evidence in support of the claims. Since, the assessee failed to furnish the documentary evidence, the ld.CIT(A), NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee as not maintainable as per law by passing an order dated 17.02.2026. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before us.

5.

The ld.AR submitted that the ld.CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the order of the AO passed u/s.147 of the Act is without jurisdiction and the reassessment was completed without complying with the statutory requirement of law. Further, the ld.AR argued that the amount credited in the bank account of the assessee

:-3-: ITA. No:2429/Chny/2026 cannot be treated as income of the assessee and the ld.CIT(A) has made an exparte order dismissing the appeal of the assessee. In view of the above, the ld.AR prayed that the Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the order of ld.CIT(A) and remit the issues to the file of Assessing Officer as the order has been passed u/s.144 of the Act. Further, ld.AR assured the bench that the ld.AR will represent on behalf of the assessee before the AO to complete the assessment proceedings effectively.

6.

Per contra, the ld.DR submitted that both the Assessing Officer and the ld.CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunity to appear before them. However, the assessee has been negligent in responding to the statutory notices and hence, prayed for confirming the order of the ld.CIT(A).

7.

We have heard the rival parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We note that the AO has passed an ex-parte order by considering the information available with the department and the same has been confirmed by the ld.CIT(A), NFAC due to the assessee failing to furnish the valid documentary evidence during appellate proceedings. Since, the assessee has failed to participate before the AO as well as the first appellate authority, we levy the cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble High Court of Madras within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and the assessee shall satisfy the payment of cost before the authorities.

8.

In view of the above and to meet the ends of justice we set aside the order of ld.CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of AO and direct the AO to denovo frame the assessment order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee to be diligent and file written submissions and relevant documents if advised so.

:-4-: ITA. No:2429/Chny/2026 9. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the court on 02nd July, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉजा जॉजा के) (एस. आर. रघुनार्था) (GEORGE GEORGE K) (S. R. RAGHUNATHA) उपाध्यक्ष /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चेन्नई/Chennai, ददनांक/Dated, the 02nd July, 2026. Devadas आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy to: 1. अपीलार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3.आयकर आयुक्त/CIT– Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem 4. पवभागीय प्रनतननधि/DR 5. गाडा फाईल/GF DEVADAS Digitally signed by DEVADAS GOPALANACHARY GOPALANACHARY Date: 2026.07.07 17:13:37 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →