NAYINARPILLAI SARAVANAN,TIRUNELVELI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TIRUNELVELI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1286/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 June 20263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the assessee's plea for a fresh opportunity due to lack of proper representation, decided to remit the appeal back to the AO. The AO is directed to call for necessary details and decide the issue afresh.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file a return of income for AY 2018-19. The AO reopened the assessment and made an addition of Rs. 39,72,100/- under Section 69A for unexplained cash deposits. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a fair opportunity to present their case before the lower authorities due to professional lapse, and if so, whether a fresh opportunity should be granted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 148,Section 148A(d),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: MS. PADMAVATHY.S & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI

For Respondent: Mr. C.P.Solomon, 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 27.01.2026 for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19.

2.

The assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income for AY 2018-19. The A.O received information that the assessee has deposited cash to the tune of Rs. 1,34,37,190/- into his bank account. Since the assessee

ITA No.1286/Chny/2026 Nayinarpillai Saravanan :- 2 -:

did not file the return of income, the A.O reopened the assessment by issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act after passing order u/s. 148A(d) of the Act. The assessee in response to notice filed the return of income declaring total income of Rs. 3,22,730/-. Since the assessee did not file any further details, based on the information available on record including the audit report, the A.O made an addition of Rs. 39,72,100/- u/s. 69A of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). Since the assessee did not respond to the notice issued by CIT(A), the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex- parte confirming the addition made by the A.O. 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 is engaged in the business of milk and news paper distribution and is not aware of the income tax proceedings and completely relied on his counsel for handling the tax matters. The Ld. AR further submitted that the counsel of the assessee did not provide proper professional support and therefore the assessee could not represent the case properly before the lower authorities. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee is a commission agent and the collection from the customers are temporarily deposited in the bank account and subsequently remitted to the principal suppliers. The ld. AR prayed for one more opportunity stating that these facts have not been submitted and examined before the lower authorities. 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 to represent the case properly by producing the required details. Accordingly, we remit the appeal back to the AO with a direction to call for

ITA No.1286/Chny/2026 Nayinarpillai Saravanan :- 3 -:

necessary details and decide the issue in accordance with law. The assessee is required to submit the necessary details as may be called for and cooperate with assessment proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

4.

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

Order pronounced on 19th day of June, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (मनु कुमार िग"र) (पदमावती यस) (Manu Kumar Giri) (Padmavathy.S) लेखा सद�य सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य �याियक �याियक सद�य �याियक �याियक सद�य सद�य / Judicial Member सद�य लेखा लेखा लेखा चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 19th June, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S 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 Digitally signed by EJTADA DURGA EJTADA DURGA NARESH NARESH Date: 2026.06.23 10:52:35 +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 →