ABDUL MAJEED SALIM,CHENNAI vs. ITO,, CHENNAI

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’
यायपीठ, चे ई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

ी मनु कुमार िग र, ाियक सद एवं
एवं
एवं
एवं

ी अिमताभ शुा, लेखा सद के सम

BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1870/Chny/2025
िनधारण वष/Assessment Year: 2018-19
Abdul Majeed Salim,
No.22A, KK Salai,
Kaveri Rangan Nagar,
Saligramam,
Chennai-600 093. v.
The DCIT,
Non Corporate Circle-8(1),
Chennai.
[PAN: AASPS 4709 C]

(अपीलाथ/Appellant)

(यथ/Respondent)

अपीलाथ क ओर से/ Appellant by :
Ms. Jesintha, Advocate
यथ क ओर से /Respondent by :
Mr. ARV Sreenivasan,
Addl.CIT
सुनवाईकतारीख/Date of Hearing
:
26.08.2025
घोषणाकतारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
26.08.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

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 17.03.2023 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee brought to our notice that the appeal has been filed belatedly by ‘761’ days and assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the cause for the delay. Having gone through the Abdul Majeed Salim
:: 2 ::

contents of the same, we find that cause for delay was reasonable, so we excuse the same and proceed to hear the assessee’s appeal on merits.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the AO made an addition of Rs.16,01,65,449/- being Unsecured loans treated as unexplained credit u/s 68 and cash deposits of Rs.6,56,98,450/- treated as unexplained credit u/s 68 of the Act. The ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as unadmitted on account of non-prosecution.
4. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us.
5. Before us, the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the assessee may be given more chance to adduce evidence and submission. The ld.DR relied upon the order of the ld.CIT(A) and pleaded for the dismissal of the appeal.
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 may be granted opportunity to file submissions and evidence.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the appeal file to the Ld. CIT(A) for hearing on merits subject to cost of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) which shall be deposited by the assessee within ‘30’ days from the date of receipt of this order to ‘Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority’ at Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The proof of the same will be furnished by the Assessee before
Abdul Majeed Salim
:: 3 ::

the Ld.CIT(A) whose shall proceed for hearing the appeal on merits after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case with all evidence and documents, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld.CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appeal 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 ld.CIT(A).
7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on the 26th day of August, 2025, in Chennai. (अिमताभ शुा)
(AMITABH SHUKLA)
लेखा सदय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (मनु कुमार िग र)
(MANU KUMAR GIRI)
याियक सदय/JUDICIAL MEMBER

चे ई/Chennai,
!दनांक/Dated: 26th August, 2025. TLN, Sr.PS
1. अपीलाथ /Appellant
2. थ /Respondent
3. आयकरआयु/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore.