Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessing Officer made additions on account of speculative income and unexplained investment. The assessee did not file a return of income and assessment was completed ex parte. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, leading to the present appeal before the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal, considering the age and pendency of the proceedings and the assessee's undertaking to cooperate, remanded the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication with directions for time-bound disposal.
Key Issues
Whether the matter should be remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication considering the assessee's undertaking to cooperate and the pendency of the case.
Sections Cited
148, 144, 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay
Year: 2011-12 Muthiah Lakshmanan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 16/3, Seethaamma Colony, 1 Main Non Corporate Ward 10(3), Road, 2nd Street, Alwarpet, Teynampet, Chennai. Chennai 600 018. [PAN:ADOPL7512R] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. T.V. Muthu Abirami, Advocate ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 18.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 23.09.2025 आदेश /O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 19.11.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2011-12.
2. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that the Assessing Officer made additions on account of income from speculation and income from unexplained investment. Admittedly, no return of income was filed by the assessee even in response to the notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short]. The Assessing Officer made addition on account of income from speculation as per NMS data in respect of the transaction on account of commodity exchange to the tune of ₹.307,03,19,200/-, wherein, we find the Assessing Officer treated income from speculation being 0.25% of the value of the commodity exchange and treated as income from speculation for being no details placed on record. Further, cash deposits to an extent of ₹.38,88,500/- added to the total income of the assessee on account of unexplained investment under section 69A of the Act for being no compliance from the assessee and completed the assessment under section 144 of the Act dated 27.12.2018. We note that no compliance whatsoever made before the ld. CIT(A), which is clear from para 5 of the impugned order.
3. Before us, the ld. AR Ms. T.V. Muthu Abirami, Advocate submits that the assessee is ready to prosecute his case before the ld. CIT(A) if this Tribunal remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A), placed on record an affidavit dated 17.09.2025 and deposed by the assessee, wherein, he undertakes to appear before the ld. CIT(A) without fail and will not seek unnecessary adjournment. The submissions of the assessee in the affidavit are reproduced herein below:
For the assessment year 2011-12, my assessment was reopened by the Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 10(3), Chennai, by issue of a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 30.03.2018. Thereafter, the assessment was completed ex parte on 27.12.2018 under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, assessing cash deposits as unexplained investment and estimating speculative income on commodity transactions and raised a demand of ₹68,45,990/-.
Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, I preferred an appeal against the said order, before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 12, Chennai. I also filed the written submissions and additional evidences on 19.08.2019. Thereafter, the National Faceless Appeal Centre, by an order dated 19.11.2024, was pleased to dismiss my appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, I have filed the present appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal on 10.07.2025.
During the pendency of the present appeal, I also filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005, dated 16.09.2025, seeking copies of the reasons recorded for reopening, approvals, audit objections and related documents, as such records are relevant to my defence. 5. When the appeal was taken up for hearing on 17th September 2025, this Hon'ble Tribunal, after taking note of the age of the proceedings and the long pendency, observed that the matter may be remanded to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for a fresh adjudication, with suitable directions for time-bound disposal. This Hon'ble Tribunal also indicated that such remand would be subject to my cooperation in the appellate proceedings. 6. Accordingly, by way of this affidavit, I respectfully undertake that I shall cooperate fully before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). I assure this Hon'ble Tribunal that I will not seek unnecessary adjournments and will make available all relevant documents and explanations, so that the matter may be disposed of expeditiously. At the same time, I humbly reserve my right to question the validity of the reopening of my assessment and to seek copies of all documents relied upon by the authorities in that regard, including reasons recorded and approvals obtained, despatch of notice and others, since such rights are available to me in law. 7. In the above circumstances, I pray that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to take this affidavit on record and pass such orders as it deems fit in the interest of justice. 4. After hearing both the parties and considering the submissions of the assessee made in the form of affidavit, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, being oldest assessment year under consideration, the assessee shall not seek any adjournment. The ld. CIT(A) shall decide the issue on merits and pass order in accordance with law in case the assessee does not file suitable explanation to substantiate his claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.. Order pronounced on 23rd September, 2025 at Chennai.