Case Law Details
Krishnakumar Devaraj Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
The assessee, an individual, challenged the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, dated 28.01.2026 for the Assessment Year 2019-20. Reassessment proceedings were initiated under the Income-tax Act, 1961, during which the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.18,03,956 in bank accounts maintained with Dhanalakshmi Bank and Disha Microfin Limited. It was also noted that the assessee had earned interest income of Rs.2,59,029 from various banks.
According to the Assessing Officer, despite the issuance of statutory notices and show-cause notices through the Faceless Assessment Scheme, the assessee failed to provide explanations or supporting evidence regarding the source of the cash deposits and the interest income. Consequently, the cash deposits were treated as unexplained money under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE, while the interest income was also brought to tax. The assessment was completed under Sections 147, 144, and 144B, determining the total income at Rs.20,62,985.
The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal on the ground of non-prosecution, as no written submissions or supporting documents were filed.
Before the Tribunal, the assessee sought another opportunity to furnish relevant evidence. The ITAT observed that both the assessment and the first appellate proceedings had been concluded ex parte without adjudication on merits. Considering that the additions arose primarily due to the absence of explanations and supporting documents, the Tribunal held that, in the interest of substantial justice, the assessee should be granted one final opportunity.
Accordingly, the ITAT set aside the orders of the lower authorities and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment after providing adequate opportunity of hearing. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
The captioned appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, [CIT(A)] dated 28.01.2026 for Assessment Year 2019-20.
2. Brief facts of the case: The assessee is an individual. For the Assessment Year 2019-20, reassessment proceedings were initiated under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. During the course of such proceedings, it was noticed that the assessee had deposited cash aggregating to Rs.18,03,956/- in bank accounts maintained with Dhanalakshmi Bank and Disha Microfin Limited during the relevant previous year. It was further observed that the assessee had earned interest income amounting to Rs.2,59,029/- from various banks. The Assessing Officer issued statutory notices and show-cause notices through the Faceless Assessment Scheme calling upon the assessee to explain the source of the cash deposits and furnish details regarding the interest income. However, according to the Assessing Officer, no compliance was made by the assessee and no satisfactory explanation or supporting evidence was furnished. In the absence of any explanation, the Assessing Officer treated the cash deposits of Rs.18,03,956/- as unexplained money under section 69A read with section 115BBE of the Act. The interest income of Rs.2,59,029/- was also brought to tax. Consequently, the assessment was completed under section 147 read with sections 144 and 144B of the Act determining the total income at Rs.20,62,985/-.
3. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). However, the Id. CIT(A), vide order dated 23.01.2026, dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to prosecute the appeal and did not file written submissions or supporting documents in support of the grounds raised. Accordingly, the additions made by the Assessing Officer were sustained.
4. Aggrieved by the order of the Id. CIT(A), the assessee is in further appeal before this Tribunal. The Id. Authorised Representative submitted that the assessee could not effectively comply with the notices issued during the assessment and appellate proceedings and sought one more opportunity to place the relevant materials and evidences on record for substantiating the source of cash deposits and other related issues.
5. The Id. Departmental Representative, on the other hand, supported the orders of the lower authorities and prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is observed that the assessment was completed ex parte under section 144 read with section 147 of the Act and that the appeal before the Id. CIT(A) was also dismissed for non-prosecution without adjudicating the issues on merits. The additions have been made primarily due to the absence of explanations and supporting evidence from the assessee. Considering the nature of the additions involved and in the interest of substantial justice, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee should be afforded one final opportunity to explain the source of the cash deposits and substantiate the claims with documentary evidence. Since the issues require verification of facts and examination of evidences at the assessment stage, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. Accordingly, the orders of the lower authorities are set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. The Assessing Officer shall examine the evidences and explanations that may be furnished by the assessee and shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law after affording adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the assessment proceedings and furnish all relevant details and documentary evidence as may be called for by the Assessing Officer. Failure to do so shall entitle the Assessing Officer to proceed in accordance with law on the basis of the material available on record.
7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on the 01st day of June, 2026, in Chennai.
Author Bio
