CHINNASAMY LALITHAMANI,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, WARD-1, TIRUCHENGODE, TIRUCHENGODE

The registry has noted delay of 110 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of affidavit of the assessee. Considering the contents of affidavit and period of delay, the delay is condoned and we proceed for disposal of the appeal on merits. During hearing, Ld. AR has pleaded for another opportunity of hearing which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. The Ld. AR also submitted that written submissions were filed by the assessee before lower authorities which has remained to be considered.

In the assessment order, Ld. AO made certain estimated additions of cash deposits u/s.69A r.w.s 115BBE. The assessee neither filed return of income nor made any representation therein. The position remained the same during appellate proceedings and accordingly, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

Though the assessee has remained negligent, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and restore the assessment back to the file of Ld. AO for de novo assessment after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case and supply the requisite information forthwith failing which Ld. AO shall be at liberty to proceed with the assessment on merits on the basis of material on record.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 3rd June, 2024 (ABY T. VARKEY) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) "ाियक सद" /JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद" / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated :03-06-2024 DS आदेशकीHितिलिपअ'ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant 2. " थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु=/CIT Chennai/Madurai/Trichy/Salem. 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF