MUTHUGOUNDER MURUGAN,RASIPURAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (2), NAMAKKAL

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

This captioned Appeals filed by the Assessee are directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT (A)-12 Mumbai [CIT(A)] dated 15.09.2025 Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The appellant, engaged in the business of hiring vehicles, earning income from a dairy business, being a partner in a firm, and receiving bank income, filed his return of income for the Assessment Year 2017-18 on 30.10.2017. He declared a total income of

ITA 3537/Chny/2025 (AY 2017-18) Muthugounder Murugan Vs ITO W 2 :: 2 :: Rs.7,50,210/- and agricultural income of Rs.9,80,130/- and paid the applicable taxes. The appellant maintains regular books of account for the aforesaid activities. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) on 24.12.2019, wherein the Assessing Officer determined the total income at Rs.20,87,210/- by making additions of Rs.10,87,000/- and Rs.2,50,000/-. These amounts were treated as unexplained money u/s. 69A and taxed u/s.115BBE of the Income-tax Act. 3. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Despite notice of hearing the assessee has not filed reply hence the ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of AO. 4. The assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal, seeking one more opportunity to substantiate the grounds of appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 5. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, supported the order of the ld.CIT(A) and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 6. We have examined the rival submissions and reviewed the order of the ld. CIT(A). It is observed that the first notice of hearing was issued on 21.01.2021 during the Covid-19 period and was not complied with. Subsequently, after a gap of more than four years, two further notices dated 06.06.2025 and 19.06.2025 were issued, which also remained uncomplied with by the assessee. We note that proper service and compliance of notice as contemplated under section 282 of the Act were not effectively ensured. In the interest of justice, we are of the opinion that the assessee should be given a final opportunity to present and substantiate the issues involved. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside, and the matter is

ITA 3537/Chny/2025 (AY 2017-18) Muthugounder Murugan Vs ITO W 2 :: 3 :: restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. The ld. CIT(A) shall provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to diligently pursue the appeal and actively participate in the appellate proceedings. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on the 16th day of April 2026, in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (प�ावती एस) (मनु कुमार िग�र) (PADMAVATHY S) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) लेखा सद%य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER &या�यक सद%य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे&नई/Chennai, (दनांक/Dated:16th April, 2026. SNDP, Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त)ल*प अ+े*षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF