MR. LOGA PRAPAKARAN MATHAN KUMAR,TRICHY vs. ITO, WARD-1, CHENNAI

आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld.CIT(A)’), Delhi, dated 05.02.2026 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘AY’) 2016-17. Stay Application is against the demand raised due to confirmation of assessment order by Ld CIT(A).

ITA No.1572Chny/2026 & SA No.104/Chny/2026 (AY 2016-17) Mr. Loga Prapakaran Mathan Kumar. :: 2 :: 2. At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee drawing our attention to the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the AO without hearing the assessee. In this regard, he brought to our notice that the Ld.CIT(A) vide notice dated 14.01.2026 directed the assessee to file his reply by 27.01.2026 and on request of the assessee, has extended the due date up to 05.02.2026; and the assessee uploaded the reply on the last date, [copy of reply has been placed before us]. However, the Ld.CIT(A) hurriedly passed the impugned order on 05.02.2026, without considering the written submission/reply uploaded by assessee. Hence, according to Ld AR, the Ld CIT(A) without complying with the principles of natural justice has passed the impugned order. He also brought to our notice that AO has passed an ex parte order without hearing the assessee and made an addition of Rs.57,00,700/- u/s.69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and ‘income from other source’ of Rs.6,112 (total Rs.57,06,812/-). Hence prayed for one more opportunity before AO relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tin Box Company vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, reported in [2001] 249 ITR 216.

ITA No.1572Chny/2026 & SA No.104/Chny/2026 (AY 2016-17) Mr. Loga Prapakaran Mathan Kumar. :: 3 :: note that the AO has passed an ex parte order without hearing the assessee and made addition of Rs.57,00,700/- u/s.69A of the Act, and ‘income from other source’ of Rs.6,112 (total Rs.57,06,812/-). Since, the AO has passed ex parte order without hearing the assessee, for the interest of justice and fair play, we restore the assessment back to the file of AO for de nova assessment, by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Tin Box Company vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax supra. The assessee is at liberty to file relevant documents, written-submission; nd the AO to pass assessment order after hearing the assessee.

Order pronounced on the 09th day of July 2026, in Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (एबी टी. वक�) (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (ABY T. VARKEY) (S.R.RAGHUNATHA) �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 09th July, 2026. YS

YASHVI Digitally signed by YASHVIR SINGH R SINGH Date: 2026.07.20 15:19:51 +05'30'

ITA No.1572Chny/2026 & SA No.104/Chny/2026 (AY 2016-17) Mr. Loga Prapakaran Mathan Kumar. :: 4 :: आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF