ARUNACHALAM ,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW 15(1), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) also passed an ex-parte order without considering documents. Upholding principles of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back for a fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 1,78,87,550/- under Section 69A based on a credit entry in the bank account. The assessee contended that the AO passed an ex-parte order without considering debit entries and that non-compliance was due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition made under Section 69A was justified without considering all relevant entries and whether the assessee was afforded a proper opportunity of hearing.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI JAGADISH
Arunachalam, The Income Tax Officer, 21/3 (Old No.43A), Vs. Non Corporate Ward-15(1), 2nd Avenue Road, Indira Nagar, Chennai. Adyar, Chennai – 600 020. [PAN: ADWPA 9208M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथF की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri N.V. Narayanan, Advocate for Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate HIथF की ओर से /Respondent by : Shri G. Suresh, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 24.06.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 12.07.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 23.02.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on 24.03.2022. :- 2 -:
The effective ground of appeal in this appeal of assessee is against confirmation of addition of Rs. 1,78,87,550/- made by A.O u/s. 69A of the Act.
The Ld. A.R has contended that the A.O has made the addition of Rs. 1,78,87,550/- u/s. 69A of the Act on the basis of credit entry in the bank account. The A.O has passed the order ex-parte without considering the debit entry and the Ld. CIT(A) has also confirmed the addition without considering any documents. The Ld. A.R further contended that the assessee could not comply before the A.O, because of the Covid-19 pandemic and the Ld. CIT(A) has not afforded the proper opportunity.
We have heard both the parties and gone through the orders of the authorities below. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the order has been passed by Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte for the non- compliance of the assessee. We are of the opinion that keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the assessee be provided with another opportunity of hearing to substantiate his case before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate this appeal afresh in accordance with law, after giving reasonable :- 3 -: opportunity to the assessee. We also direct the Assessee to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on the date of hearing without fail. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 12th July, 2024. (जगदीश) (यस यस िव"ने" रिव) (Jagadish) (SS Viswanethra Ravi) लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य /Accountant Member लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य सद"य / Judicial Member "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य चे"ई/Chennai, "दनांक/Dated: 12th July, 2024. EDN/-
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 →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026