KANNAPPAN SANTHAMOORTHI, KRISHNAGIRI vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), KRISHNAGIRI, KRISHNAGIRI

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “सी” �ायपीठ चे�ई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय �ी एस. एस. िव�ने� रिव, �ाियक सद! एवं माननीय �ी मनोज कुमार अ&वाल ,लेखा सद! के सम(। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ ITA No.81/Chny/2024 (िनधा,रण वष, / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Kannappan Santhamoorthi ITO बनाम 3/9, Barur, Pochampalli, Ward-1(1), / Vs. Krishnagiri-635 201. Krishnagiri. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. DOQPS-0047-A (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (� थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri P.M. Kathir (Advocate) - Ld. AR � थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) - Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 01-05-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 06-05-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 arises out of an order passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Salem [CIT(A)] on 30-08-2019 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 28-12- 2017. The sole grievance of the assessee is confirmation of addition of Rs.24.62 Lacs on account of cash deposits. 2. The registry has noted a delay of 1535 days in the appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of a

condonation petition which is accompanied by affidavit of the assessee. The Ld. AR submitted that if Covid-19 Lockdown period is excluded, the delay would be substantially lower. In the affidavit, it has been submitted that due to ongoing divorce proceedings, the assessee was not staying at the given address and therefore, missed the notices and the impugned order. It was only when the demand notices were received from Tax Recovery Officer, the fact of passing of impugned order came to the notice of the assessee after which the assessee took steps to file the resent appeal. It has also been pleaded that the delay was neither willful not wanton but due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. Though Ld. Sr. DR has opposed admission of appeal, however, considering the adverse circumstances being faced by the assessee, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. The Ld. AR has prayed for another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. 4. From case records, it emerges that the assessee maintained 4 bank accounts and deposited cash of Rs.202.18 Lacs as tabulated in para 4.1 of the assessment order. However, the declared turnover was Rs.7.09 Lacs only. The assessee failed to file any supportive documents but submitted that the cash was received from his father as well as from certain other persons. Since there were deposits as well as withdrawals, Ld. AO considered peak credit and made impugned addition of Rs.24.62 Lacs. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of Ld. AO on the ground that the assessee has not raised any specific objection to the same. Still aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.