DAAMODARAN MALARKODI,VELLORE vs. ITO, WARD-1,, VELLORE
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, considering principles of natural justice, set aside the impugned order and restored the appeal to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment. The assessee was directed to provide all evidence and submissions.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was filed belatedly by 570 days, with an affidavit explaining the delay. The Assessing Officer passed an ex-parte order under Section 144, making additions under Sections 69A and 69C. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal for failure to respond to notices and provide evidence.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal filed belatedly should be admitted and whether the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity for de novo assessment after a lapse in compliance.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI HON’BLE S.R. RAGHUNATHA
आदेश / O R D E R
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member): The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/NFAC, Delhi [‘CIT(A)’ in short] dated 31.10.2023 for Assessment Year 2017-18.
At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee brought to our notice that the appeal has been filed belatedly by ‘570’ days and assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the cause for the delay. Having gone through the contents of the same, we find that cause for delay was assessee’s appeal on merits.
The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (A.O.)
passed an ex-parte order u/s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 17.12.2019, assessing the total income at Rs.48,93,197/- on account of addition of unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act and unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.
1. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A), however, observed that the assessee failed to respond to the notices issued and also failed to furnish any documentary evidence in support of his contentions. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and upheld the order of the A.O.
Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us.
Before us, the Ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the assessee may be granted another opportunity to adduce evidence and submissions. The Ld. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and pleaded for the dismissal of the appeal.
Daamodaran Malarkodi :- 3 -: 6. Though we some extent concur with the submissions of Ld. DR, however, keeping in mind the natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee should be granted an opportunity to file submissions and evidence. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of the A.O for denovo assessment on merits, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate his case with all evidence and documents, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which AO shall be at liberty to proceed with the assessment proceedings on merits as per law. Legal issues are open. The ld. AR of the asssessee also assured us that the assessee will prosecute the case diligently before the authorities.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on 26th day of September, 2025 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Vinay Singh vs. Union Of INDIAAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Aaradhyam Infrabuilders PVT LTD vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
