V. AROKIARAJ,VRIDHACHALAM vs. ITO WARD 5, CUDDALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the appeal to the file of the AO for denovo adjudication. This was done to provide a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee, considering the ex-parte assessment before the AO and the notices issued during the Covid-19 pandemic.
What were the facts?
The assessee made substantial cash deposits into his savings bank account but did not file a return of income. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition under Section 69A for unexplained cash credits. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) and the ITAT.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity of hearing before the lower authorities, and whether the assessment order should be set aside for denovo adjudication.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI
(िनधा�रणवष� / Assessment Year: 2012-2013) V. Arokiaraj, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Old No.6/109, New No.9/45, Ward 5, North Street, Cuddalore. Kunankurichi, Vridhachalam 607 803. [PAN: AKCPA 1663P] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/ Appellant by : None ��यथ� क� ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, IRS, JCIT सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 19.08.2024 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 23.08.2024 आदेश / O R D E R MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)(NFAC) Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 16.04.2024 for Assessment Year 2012-13.
Assessee is an individual and has made substantial cash deposit into his savings bank account but did not file the return of income. Therefore, on the basis of the same, the case of the assessee has been reopened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (In short ‘Act’). The assessee, thereafter filed his return of income on 10.06.2019 for AY 2012-13 admitting a total income of Rs.60,000/-. The assessee has also filed a letter dated 09.09.2019 explaining the cash deposits made in bank. However, the AO has passed order under section 144 r.w. section 147 of the Act dated 24.12.2019 an addition of Rs.43,57,595/- under section 69A of the Act rejecting the explanation of the assessee.
Further, the appellant filed the appeal against the order under section 144 r.w. section 147 of the Act dated 24.12.2019 before the Ld.CIT(A) wherein the assessee neither appeared nor submitted any submissions before the first appeal authority. Accordingly, the assessment was confirmed on merits against which assessee is in further appeal before us.
None appeared before us for the assessee. We have rejected the adjournment application filed by the assessee. The Ld.DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to appear before the ld. first appellate authority also.
Though we concur with the submissions of Ld.DR, Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT however, having perused the record and keeping in mind the principle of natural justice and grant proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee, the appeal requires fresh adjudication. We have also seen before AO assessee was ex-parte and before ld.CIT(A) most of notices dated 18.01.2021, 07.02.2022 u/s 250 of the Act were issued during Covid-19 Pandemic. Accordingly, for complete adjudication at grass root itself, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld.AO for denovo adjudication after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld. AO shall be at liberty to proceed with the assessment.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd day of August, 2024 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Basant Kumar Gupta vs. Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S Swapnashiyana Homes Developers Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026