VIJAYALAKSHMI, LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI K.S. VENUGOPAL,TELANGANA vs. ITO, NCW-3(1), CHENNAI

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ ायपीठ, चेई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘D’ 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.1499/Chny/2025
िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Year: 2017-18

Vijayalakshmi,
(Legal heir of late Shri K.S.
Venugopal),
Villa-51, Bloomdale Villas,
Shamirpet,
Secunderabad – 500 101. Vs.
The Income Tax Officer,
Non Corporate Ward-8(1),
Chennai.
[PAN: BYFPK 2135N]

(अपीलाथ/Appellant)

( यथ/Respondent)

अपीलाथH की ओर से/ Appellant by :
Shri V. Elangovan, C.A JKथH की ओर से /Respondent by :
Shri C. Murugesan, Addl. CIT

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing
:
14.08.2025
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
22.08.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 14.09.2023 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 24.09.2019. Vijayalakshmi, Legal Heir of Late Shri K.S.Venugopal

:- 2 -:

:- 3 -:

Accordingly, notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act was issued, which remained non complied, as the notice was returned by the postal authority with the remark “Left.” Thereafter, the notice was also served through the Inspector, who reiterated that the assessee was not available at the said address. The A.O, therefore, completed the assessment ex-parte u/s. 144 of the Act, making addition of credits in bank accounts of Rs.19,49,994/-. Aggrieved, the legal heir, Ms. Vijaya Lakshmi, daughter of the assessee, filed an appeal in Form-35 before the Ld.
CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee had not made payment of the advance tax as required under section 249(4) of the Act.
5. Before us, the Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) submitted that the deceased assessee, along with his family members, had sold their joint property on 05.11.2016 for Rs. 34,00,000/-, and the entire sale consideration was received in cash for meeting medical expenses, which was later deposited in the bank account. It was explained that the assessee, being old and ailing, was residing in an old age home and was not aware of the notices issued in the assessment proceedings. In support of the contention, a copy of the sale deed was filed to substantiate the source of cash deposits. The Vijayalakshmi, Legal Heir of Late Shri K.S.Venugopal

:- 4 -:

Ld. A.R further contended that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on a technical ground without affording proper opportunity of hearing, and therefore, one more opportunity may be granted to explain the source of the deposits.
6. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (D.R) relied on the orders of the lower authorities.
7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The A.O, in the ex parte order passed u/s 144 , has made addition of credit in bank accounts of Rs 19,49,994/- . The legal heir has explained the reasons for non-compliance of the notices. It is also noted that the notices issued could not be effectively served on the assessee. The Ld CIT(A) has also dismissed the appeal on technical ground without going into merit of the case. Considering the facts and in the interest of principles of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to substantiate her case before the A.O. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the A.O for denovo assessment in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate and furnish all requisite details before the A.O on the date of hearing.
Vijayalakshmi, Legal Heir of Late Shri K.S.Venugopal

:- 5 -: