DR. K. JAGADEESAN,,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD - 4(3),, CHENNAI

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Chennai dated 27.01.2020 relevant to the assessment year 2013-14. Besides challenging the exparte order, the assessee has also agitated that the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the issues on merits.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2013-14 on 30.07.2013 declaring total income of ₹.1,80,000/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] was issued on 04.09.2014 and duly served on 23.09.2014 on the assessee. Since the assessee has not produced the books of accounts and explained the source for the cash deposits with Punjab National Bank [PNB] with proper explanation, the entire cash deposits were brought to tax under section 68 of the Act and the Assessing Officer has completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment order since the assessee has not explained the source or availed of various opportunities afforded to him.

On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. When the appeal was taken up for hearing, none appeared before us on behalf of the assessee despite service of notice (RPAD on record). Therefore, we proceed to dispose of this appeal, after hearing the ld. DR.

We have heard the ld. DR, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. On perusal of the records and as per the details available with the Department, the assessee made cash deposits amounting to ₹.18,30,000/- with Punjab National Bank. Vide a letter submitted by the Assessee, it was submitted before the Assessing Officer that funds have come from the assessee’s wife Smt. Meera Jagadeesan, received by cash only in respect of ₹.18,30,000/- and in respect of the other amounts from Smt. Meera Jagadeesan, it was only through cheques. It was also stated that the cheques have been issued to the loan creditors by the assessee, subsequently, utilizing the inflow of funds. However, no evidence in respect of the claim by the assessee has been filed by the AR of the assessee. Hence, the Assessing Officer has held that the assessee has not discharged his obligation to explain the source within the meaning of section 68 of the Act and hence the same was treated as the income of the assessee and brought to tax. On appeal, since the assessee has neither produced any evidence nor availed various opportunities of hearing afforded to the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) has held that the amount of ₹.18,30,000/- found credited to the Assessee’s bank account clearly falls within the ambit of section 69A of the Act, which, deals with unexplained money duly recorded in the books of accounts of the assessee. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition. Even before the Tribunal, the assessee has not furnished any details in support of his claim. Accordingly, we sustain the order of the ld. CIT(A) and dismissed the ground raised by the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on the 27th October, 2021 in Chennai.