RAMESH,TUTICORIN vs. ITO WARD 2, TUTICORIN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 508/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 September 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the consistent non-compliance by the assessee at all levels of assessment and appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal confirmed the order of the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to make any compliances before the Assessing Officer (AO) and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) despite several opportunities and notices. The appeal was listed for hearing, but the assessee remained unrepresented.

What were the issues?

Whether the additions made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) are sustainable in the absence of any compliance or evidence from the assessee. The primary issue is the assessee's failure to respond to statutory notices and provide necessary information.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Hearing: 20.07.2026Pronounced: 18.09.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी इंटूरी रामाराव, लेखा सद� एवं �ी एस.एस. िव�ने� रिव, �ाियक सद� के सम� । Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.508/Chny/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Ramesh, Vs. The Income tax Officer, 20/69, 5TH street, Roche Colony Ward 2, Tuticorin, Tamil Nadu Tuticorin. 628 001. [PAN: ALCPR8245B]

(अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : None ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Nayani Swapna, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 20.07.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 18.09.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17.11.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2018-19.

2.

We find that this appeal was filed on 30.01.2026 and, after scrutiny, the Registry, ITAT, Chennai Benches, issued notice dated 25.03.2026 by RPAD, intimating the assessee about the fixation of the appeal on 27.05.2026. On perusal of the record, no proceedings were conducted on 27.05.2026 and the appeal was adjourned to 20.07.2026. On 20.07.2026,

2 I.T.A. No.508/Chny/26

on perusal of the record, we note that the notice dated 27.05.2026 was returned unserved with an endorsement that the assessee left. We find no representation on behalf of the assessee, nor any application filed seeking adjournment. The assessee was called absent and we proceed to hear the Ld. DR, Ms. Nayani Swapna, CIT, and pass the order based on the material available on record.

3.

We find the AO sought details regarding cash deposits and cash withdrawals in the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Act, as there was no return of income filed by the assessee. On perusal of the assessment order, it is noted that the AO issued notices under Section 142(1) on two occasions and thereafter, show-cause notices on two occasions, the details of which are reflected on page No. 2 of the assessment order, wherein no compliances were made by the assessee with reference to the details sought by the AO. Further, on perusal of para No. 4.4 of the assessment order, we note that the AO made addition in the absence of any compliances made by the assessee vide its order dated 25.01.2024. Further, aggrieved by the said assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), wherein no full compliances were made by the assessee in the first appellate proceedings, which is evident from pages Nos. 4 and 5 of the impugned order. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A), having no option, confirmed the order of the AO.

4.

Ld. DR, Ms. Nayani Swapna, CIT, vehemently argued that the assessee made no compliances before the AO and Ld. CIT(A), inspite of availing many opportunities by way of statutory notices. The assessee did

3 I.T.A. No.508/Chny/26

not even file any evidence before the ITAT and prayed to dismiss the appeal of the assessee.

5.

Having heard the Ld. DR and on perusal of the material available on record, as rightly pointed out by the Ld. DR, we find no compliances whatsoever made by the assessee before the AO and Ld. CIT(A), which is evident from the relevant paragraphs mentioned hereinabove. Therefore, we have no option except to confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Thus, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced on 18th September, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 18.09.2026 MM/- आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant, 2.��थ�/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड� फाईल/GF.

MANISH Digitally signed by MANISH MISHRA MISHRA Date: 2026.09.23 14:51:29 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →