KUMAR,CUDDALORE vs. ITO, WARD-2,, CUDDALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the appeal was dismissed on a technical default without considering the merits of the addition. The assessment was set aside and restored to the AO for a fresh assessment.
What were the facts?
The assessee did not file a return of income, and the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 72.52 Lacs on account of cash deposits. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without admitting it due to non-payment of advance tax.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on a technical ground without adjudicating the merits of the addition made by the AO.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 69A,Section 249(4)(b)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ/वाल ,लेखा सद4 एवं माननीय +ी मनु कुमार िग7र, "ाियक सद4 के सम8। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Kumar ITO, No.1, Ayyanor Koil, Ward -2, बनाम/ East Usuppur Village and Panchayat, Cuddalore. Vs. Chidambaram Town and Taluk, Cuddalore – 608 401. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. ARRPK-4550-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri N. Arjun Raj (Advocate) -Ld. AR " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri AR V Sreenivasan (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 30-04-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 06-05-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 28-12-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act on 23-03- 2022. The assessee did not file return of income. The assessment has been framed on best judgment basis wherein Ld. AO made addition of cash deposit for Rs.72.52 Lacs u/s.69A of the Act. The assessee preferred further appeal. The Ld. CIT(A), invoking the provisions of Sec.249(4)(b), held that the assessee was to pay amount of advance tax otherwise the appeal would not be admitted. Since the assessee failed to do so, the appeal was not admitted. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee did not file return of income on the belief that it had no tax liability. The Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee is a non-filer and failed to substantiate its case.
It emerges that the assessee has not filed its return for the year and the sole addition represent cash deposited by the assessee during demonetization period. We find that that the appeal has been dismissed merely on technical default without going into the merits of the addition. Nevertheless, considering the fact that the assessee has remained unrepresented before lower authorities, we set aside the assessment and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. AO for de novo assessment with a direction to the assessee to substantiate its case forthwith. A reasonable opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. 3. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 6th May, 2024 (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) "ाियक सद4 / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद4 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 06-05-2024 DS आदेशकीNितिलिपअ/ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant 2. " थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु=/CIT 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026