NATARAJ SHANMUGAVEL,DINDIGUL vs. DCIT, WARD-1, DINDIGUL
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘सी’ ायपीठ, चेई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
ी मनु कुमार िगर ,ाियक सद एवं ी एस
.
आर
.
रघुनाथा, लेखा सद के सम&
BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.329/Chny/2025
(िनधारण वष / Assessment Year: 2014-15)
Shri Nataraj Shanmugavel,
2A, EVR Salai,
West Govindhapuram,
Dindigul-624 001. Vs
The DCIT,
Ward-1
Dindigul.
PAN : EHVPS-9432-L
(अपीलाथ/Appellant)
(यथ/Respondent)
अपीलाथकओरसे/ Appellant by :
Mr. A.G. Sathyanarayanan,
Advocate (Virtual)
यथकओरसे/Respondent by :
Ms. Anitha, Addl.CIT
सुनवाईकतारीख/Date of hearing
:
23.04.2025
घोषणाकतारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
24.04.2025
आदेश
आदेश
आदेश
आदेश / O R D E R
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals)(NFAC) Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 26.10.2024 for Assessment
Year 2014-15. 2. Brief facts of the case are that as per information available on record with the department, the assessee had made cash deposit of Rs.1,21,03,301/- during the year under consideration for AY 2014-
15. The case was reopened by issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act on 30.03.2021. In the absence of furnishing any evidence to prove cash deposits in the bank by the assessee, the AO proceeded to pass ex- parte order u/s.147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act and treated the 2
whole cash deposits as unexplained money of the assessee u/s.69A of the Act.
3. Aggrieved the assessee challenged the assessment order before the CIT(A). However, despite several notices issued, the assessee neither filed written submissions nor appeared before the CIT(A) and hence, the CIT(A) confirmed order of the AO.
Now, the assessee is in appeal before us.
4. We have heard rival submissions and perused records. From the assessment order, we note that notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued during Covid-19 Pandemic on 30.03.2021. Subsequently, notice u/s.142(1) was issued to the assessee on 10.03.2022. Even notice u/s.143(2) was issued on 28.02.2022. Being Covid-19
Pandemic period, notices u/s.142(1) and 143(2) were just issued within one month prior to completion of assessment on 24.03.2022. Hence, in the light of peculiar facts and taking into consideration the gravity of Covid-19 Pandemic prevailing at that point of time, in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order and remit back the matter to the file of AO for denovo adjudication, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. All the legal issues in this appeal are kept open.
3
5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 24th April, 2025 (एस
.
आर
.
रघुनाथा)
( मनु कुमार िगर )
( S.R.Raghunatha )
( Manu Kumar Giri)
लेखा
लेखा
लेखा
लेखा सदय
सदय
सदय
सदय / Accountant Member ाियक सद / Judicial Member
चेई/Chennai,
दनांक/Date:24.04.2025
DS
आदेश क ितिलिप अेिषत/Copy to:
1.Appellant
2.Respondent
3. आयकर आयु/CIT Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem
4. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR
5. गाड फाईल/GF.