PERIASAMY SHANKAR,ERODE vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), ERODE
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ ायपीठ, चेई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
ी यस यस िव ने रिव, ाियक सद एवं ी जगदीश, लेखा सद के सम'
BEFORE SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2447/Chny/2025
िनधा8रण वष8 /Assessment Year: 2016-17
Periasamy Shankar,
34/96, Nehruji Street,
Nadarmedu,
Erode – 638 002. PAN: AYUPS 8738F
Vs.
The Income Tax Officer,
Ward-1(1),
Erode.
(अपीलाथ/Appellant)
( यथ/Respondent)
अपीलाथF की ओर से/ Appellant by :
Shri S. Bhupendran, Advocate
HIथF की ओर से /Respondent by :
Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. CIT(virtual)
सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing
:
19.11.2025
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
28.11.2025
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad [hereinafter “Addl. CIT(A)”] dated 28.08.2025 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 30.12.2019. Periasamy Shankar
:- 2 -:
The A.O has reopened assessment for the reason that the assessee along with three other persons has purchased a property for a total consideration of Rs. 64 lakhs, the guideline value of which was Rs. 78,44,443/-. The A.O in the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act has made the addition of Rs. 10,50,000/- u/s. 69B of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. Addl. CIT(A). However, the Addl. Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal ex-parte as the assessee failed to comply with the notices issued.
The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has submitted that Ld. Addl. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the matter on merits and therefore, in the interest of justice, it was prayed that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to substantiate his case before the A.O.
On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), has relied on the orders of lower authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. We find that the A.O and Ld. Addl. CIT(A) passed orders ex-parte as the assessee failed to explain the sources for an amount of Rs.10,50,000/-. It is also noted that the assessee has been Periasamy Shankar
:- 3 -:
negligent in pursuing the matter both before the A.O and the Ld. Addl.
CIT(A). However, keeping in view the principles of natural justice, we are of the opinion that one more opportunity should be granted to the assessee to substantiate his case before the A.O. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the file of the A.O for denovo assessment in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply with all the notices issued by the A.O and furnish all relevant details for fresh consideration. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 28th day of November, 2025 at Chennai. (यस यस िव ने रिव) (SS Viswanethra Ravi) याियक याियक याियक याियक सदय सदय सदय सदय / Judicial Member (जगदीश) (Jagadish) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सदय सदय सदय सदय /Accountant Member चेनई/Chennai, दनांक/Dated: 28th November, 2025. EDN, Sr. P.S Periasamy Shankar
:- 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