##PAGE1##

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ (cid:7008)यायपीठ, चे(cid:7382)ई।

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

(cid:373)ी एबी टी. वक(cid:334), (cid:586)ाियक सद(cid:735) एवं

(cid:373)ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद(cid:735) के सम(cid:407)

BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2085, 2086 & 2087/Chny/2025

िनधा(cid:6981)रण वष/(cid:6981) Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2019-20

Mr.B. Anand Babu, v. The DCIT,

225A, Sambal Thottam, Central Circle-3,

Samichettipalayam, Coimbatore.

Coimbatore-641 047.

[PAN: AHNPB 9506 A]

(अपीलाथ(cid:7278)/Appellant) ((cid:7079)(cid:7004)यथ(cid:7278)/Respondent)

अपीलाथ(cid:7278) क(cid:7409) ओर स/े Appellant by : Mr.A.G. Sathyanarayana,

Advocate &

Mr. Shrenik Chordia, CA

(cid:7079)(cid:7004)यथ(cid:7278) क(cid:7409) ओर स े /Respondent by : Ms.R. Anitha, Addl.CIT

सुनवाईक(cid:7409)तारीख/Date of Hearing : 04.12.2025

घोषणाक(cid:7409)तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 22.12.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:

These are appeals preferred by the assessee is against the orders of

the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (hereinafter referred

to as ‘Ld.CIT(A)‘), Chennai-18, all dated 13.06.2025 for the Assessment

Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘AY‘) 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2019-20.

2. Briefly stated, the facts relating to the present appeal are that, a

search action u/s.132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

ITA Nos.2085, 2086 & 2087/Chny/2025

(AYs 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2019-20)

Mr.B. Anand Babu

:: 2 ::

to as ‘the Act‘) was conducted on 06.03.2019 at the business premises of

Shri K. K. Kalyanasundaram [Sri Sri Masaniamman Thunai Chit Funds

Kovai Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘SMT Chit Funds‘). In the course

of search, it was inter alia certain incriminating materials were

discovered, which according to the Revenue revealed that assessee had

received cash loan of ₹15,50,000/-, ₹1,50,00,000/- and ₹1,22,23,000/-

for AYs 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2019-20 respectively from Shri

Kalyanasundaram, which was admitted by the searched person in his

sworn statement recorded u/s.132(4) of the Act. Based on the aforesaid

facts, the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271D against the assessee

for accepting cash in violation of Section 269SS of the Act, but didn’t pass

any assessment order against assess for those AY’s. Pursuant to the AO’s

letter to Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income Tax dated 21.04.2022 in this

regard for penalty, the Addl/JCIT in-turn by letter dated 29.04.2022,

forwarded the same to the ‘Faceless Unit’ which gave notice of penalty

u/s.271D on 10.06.2022; and thereafter, the Income Tax Authority

acknowledges that assessee replied by letter dated 29.08.2022, wherein

he denied receiving any loan in cash from Shri Kalyanasundaram. Not

satisfied with the reply of assessee, and holding the denial of assessee to

have received cash loan from searched person to be self serving, the

Income Tax Authority finally levied penalty u/s.271D of the Act in

ITA Nos.2085, 2086 & 2087/Chny/2025

(AYs 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2019-20)

Mr.B. Anand Babu

:: 3 ::

December, 2022 by levying penalty @100% of the alleged amount taken

as cash across captioned three (3) AY’s.

3. Aggrieved by levy of penalty supra by the Faceless Income Tax

Unit, the assessee preferred appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). In the

appellate proceedings, the assessee again reiterated his stand that he

didn’t take any cash loan as alleged by the Revenue. Moreover, the Ld.

CIT(A) found the denial of assessee to be not acceptable for the reason

that assessee failed to discharge the burden of rebutting the incriminating

material found during search against him for levy of penalty u/s.271D of

the Act and confirmed the penalty for all the three assessment years by

passing the appellate order on 13.06.2025.

4. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has

filed the present appeals. And since both parties agree that facts are

same for all three (3) AYs & there is no change in facts or law, but only

the var