Skip to main content

Natarajan Vasudevan Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward-3(2), Coimbatore

Case No: ITA No.3365/Chny/2025
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ‘B’ Bench: Chennai
Date: 1/29/2026

Parties Involved

appellantNatarajan Vasudevan
respondentThe Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward-3(2), Coimbatore

Facts Summary

The assessee, Natarajan Vasudevan, did not file the return of income for Assessment Year 2020-21. The Assessing Officer (AO) received information about certain financial transactions of the assessee and issued a notice under section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee filed the return of income on 15.04.2024 declaring a total income of Rs.1,30,600. The AO completed the assessment under section 147, assessing the income at Rs.1,13,48,150. Aggrieved by this, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (CIT(A)), who passed an order on 25.09.2025. The assessee then filed a further appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee submitted additional evidences before the CIT(A), which were refused to be admitted.

Decision in favour of

Assessee

Legal Issues

  • 1. Whether the Impugned Order is unjust, unreasonable and bad in law.
  • 2. Whether the First Appellate Authority erred in sustaining the additions without considering the explanations and submissions in proper perspective.
  • 3. Whether the First Appellate Authority erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer regarding the validity of the notice under section 148.
  • 4. Whether the First Appellate Authority erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer regarding the issuance of notice under section 148 by JAO instead of FAO.
  • 5. Whether the First Appellate Authority erred in rejecting the prayer for admission of Additional Evidence under Rule-46A.
  • 6. Whether the First Appellate Authority erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the scope and effect of the proviso to section 251(1)(a).

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

1 precedent cited in this judgement.

Opakhya LogoOpakhya

AI-powered tax-litigation platform. Find precedents using natural language, draft submissions in minutes, and run your entire case repository from a single secure workspace.

© 2025 Opakhya. All rights reserved.

Core Features

Additional Features

  • Smart Comments
  • Export Options
  • Quick Copy
  • Analytics Dashboard
Version 2.0.1Last updated: October 2025
Powered by AI & Machine Learning