PALRAJ BALAJI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-19(4),, CHENNAI

The assessee had made cash deposits amounting to Rs.

56,96,100/- during the relevant financial year but had not filed the return of income. Consequently, the A.O reopened the assessment and completed the assessment ex-parte u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 and 144B of the Act, making an addition of Rs. 56,96,100/-. Aggrieved against the addition, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) passed order ex-parte without adjudicating the issue on merits as the assessee has not made compliance to the notices issued.

The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had passed order ex-parte without adjudicating the issue on merits therefore, one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to substantiate his case before the Ld. CIT(A).

On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), relied on the orders of lower authorities and submitted that the orders were passed ex-parte as the assessee has been non compliance to the notices issued.

We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition of cash deposits amounting to Rs.56,96,100/- u/s. 69A of the Act, due to the non- compliance of the assessee, without adjudicating the issue on merits. Accordingly, we set aside the orders passed by the A.O and the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the A.O to decide the appeal on merits. The A.O shall pass a reasoned order after providing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee, in accordance with law. We also direct the assessee to co-operate with the proceedings and appear before the A.O on the date of hearing without fail. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 26th day of June, 2025 at Chennai.