NATHELLA SAMPATHU CHETTY & CO.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NCC-4(1), CHENNAI
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ ायपीठ, चेई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
ी एबी टी. वक , ाियक सद! एवं ी जगदीश, लेखा सद! के सम(
BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2183/Chny/2025
िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2018-19
Nathella Sampathu Chetty & Co.,
C/o J. Prabhakar, B.Com., FCA.,
Chartered Accountant,
Residenty Apartment,
New No.245, Old No.108,
TTK Road, Alwarpet,
Chennai – 600 018. PAN: AAAFN 2640M
Vs.
The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax,
Non Corporate Circle-4(1),
Chennai.
(अपीलाथ/Appellant)
( यथ/Respondent)
अपीलाथ की ओर से/ Appellant by :
Shri J. Prabhakar, C.A (Virtual)
HIथ की ओर से /Respondent by :
Shri Nishanth Rao, JCIT
सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing
:
23.10.2025
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
30.10.2025
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 25.02.2025 in the matter of assessment framed by the Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. Nathella Sampathu Chetty & Co.
:- 2 -:
147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 27.03.2023. 2. There is a delay of 97 days in filing the appeal by the assessee.
The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the petition/affidavit of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned.
3. The assessee is a firm and has not filed the return of income for the relevant assessment year. The A.O, on the basis of information that the assessee had made cash deposits in the bank account of Rs.3,74,46,000/- and sold immovable property of Rs. 4,00,00,000/-, reopened the assessment. Before the A.O, the assessee explained that the cash deposits amounting to Rs.3,74,46,000/- represented collections from chit subscribers, which were deposited into the bank account. However, the A.O did not accept the explanation and completed the assessment under section 147 of the Act, making an addition of Rs.3,74,46,000/- under section 69A of the Act, treating the same as unexplained money. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld.
Nathella Sampathu Chetty & Co.
:- 3 -:
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte on the ground that the assessee had failed to comply with the various notices issued.
4. The Learned Authorized Representative (Ld. A.R) contended that the Ld. CIT(A) passed order ex-parte without giving sufficient opportunity to substantiate its case. It was therefore submitted that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to present its case before the Ld. CIT(A).
5. The Learned Departmental Representative (Ld. D.R) relied on the orders of the lower authorities and requested that the appeal be dismissed.
6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte as the assessee had not responded to the notices issued and had failed to substantiate the nature and source of the cash deposits with supporting evidence such as details of chit subscribers, their names, addresses, PAN, and confirmation letters. In our considered opinion, sufficient opportunity was not provided to the assessee before confirming the addition made under section 69A of the Act. Therefore, keeping in view the principles of natural justice, we are of the view that Nathella Sampathu Chetty & Co.
:- 4 -:
one more opportunity should be granted to the assessee to substantiate its case before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld.
CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) and furnish all relevant details in support of its claim for fresh consideration. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 30th day of October, 2025 at Chennai. (एबी टी. वक )
(ABY. T. Varkey)
ाियक सद! / Judicial Member
(जगदीश)
(Jagadish)
लेखा सद! /Accountant Member
चेनई/Chennai, दनांक/Dated: 30th October, 2025. EDN, Sr. P.S
आदेश क ितिलप अेषत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ/Appellant
2. थ/Respondent
3. आयकर आयु/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem
4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR
5. गाड फाईल/GF