RAYAKOTTAI KUPPUSAMINDAIDU JAGADEESAN KRISHNAGIRI ,KRISHNAGIRI vs. ITO, WARD 1, HOSUR, HOSUR
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE (RETD.) CHANDRAKANT VASANT BHADANG & SHRI MANJUNATHA.G, HON’BLE
आदेश / O R D E R PER MANJUNATHA.G, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Income Tax Department, National
Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 25.09.2023, and pertains to
assessment year 2017-18.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual filed
his return of income for AY 2017-18 on 29.09.2017 declaring total taxable
ITA No.1333/Chny/2023 :: 2 ::
income of Rs.6,00,910/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and during
the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that the assessee
has made cash deposits of Rs.60,10,000/- in his bank account during
demonetization period. It was further noticed that the entire cash deposits
is made in Specified Bank Notes on various dates during the period from
09.11.2016 to 30.12.2016. The AO called upon the assessee to explain
source for cash deposits. Since, the assessee could not substantiate source
for cash deposits of Rs.24,10,000/- by filing necessary evidences, the AO
made additions u/s.69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act")
as unexplained money.
The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the First Appellate
Authority, but neither appeared before the Ld.CIT(A) nor furnished any
evidences to justify source for cash deposits. Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A)
disposed off appeal filed by the assessee ex parte on the basis of materials
available on record and upheld the additions made by the AO towards cash
deposits u/s.69A r.w.s.115BBE of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the
Ld.CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us.
The Ld.Counsel for the assessee, Shri G. Baskar, Advocate, referring
to the date of hearing provided by the Ld.CIT(A), more particularly, on the
last date of hearing on 24.08.2023 submitted that the assessee has filed a
letter dated 24.08.2023, in response, notice dated 09.08.2023, and
furnished certain evidences including revised VAT returns. Further, the
assessee has sought adjournment for seven days to file remaining
ITA No.1333/Chny/2023 :: 3 ::
evidences to justify source for cash deposits. Although, the assessee has
sought adjournment for filing certain evidences, but the Ld.CIT(A) has
disposed off appeal filed by the assessee without considering the request
of the assessee. Therefore, appeal may be set aside to the file of the
Ld.CIT(A) to give another opportunity of hearing to the assessee to justify
his case.
The Ld.DR present for the Revenue supporting the order of the
Ld.CIT(A) submitted that the assessee could not furnish necessary
evidences within the time sought by his letter dated 24.08.2023.
Therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly disposed off appeal filed by the
assessee on the basis of materials available on record and their orders
should be upheld.
We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on
record and gone through orders of the authorities below. There is no
dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee has not pursued his case
before the First Appellate Authority with utmost care and diligent which is
evident from the fact that although, the Ld.CIT(A) has given sufficient
opportunities, but the assessee could not file complete details to justify
source for cash deposits. At the same time, although, the Ld.CIT(A) has
disposed off appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution, but failed to
decide the issue on merits with reasoning which is evident from the order
of the Ld.CIT(A), where the Ld.CIT(A) in one line upheld the additions made
by the AO towards cash deposits u/s.69A of the Act. In our considered
ITA No.1333/Chny/2023 :: 4 :: view, even in a case where the appeal is disposed off for non-prosecution or ex parte for non-appearance, the appeal should be disposed off on merits on the basis of materials available on record. In the present case, the Ld.CIT(A) disposed off appeal filed by the assessee on technical grounds without discussing the issues on merits. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the issues need to go back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, and thus, we set aside order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the issues to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to re-adjudicate the issues in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee shall appear before the Ld.CIT(A) and file necessary evidences without seeking any adjournment.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on the 23rd day of January, 2024, in Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (मंजूनाथा.जी) (चं�कांत वसंत भडंग) (MANJUNATHA.G) (C.V. BHADANG) लेखा सद�/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER अ)* /PRESIDENT चे�ई/Chennai, िदनांक/Dated: 23rd January, 2024. TLN आदेश की "ितिलिप अ,ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ! / Appellant 3. आयकर आयु- / CIT 5. गाड� फाईल / GF 2. "#थ! / Respondent 4. िवभागीय "ितिनिध / DR
