M/S. THARAGAI MATCHING,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD-1,, PUDUKKOTTAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1248/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 May 2026AY 2020-214 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and granted the assessee one more opportunity to present their case. The appeal was remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication after the assessee provides necessary details.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a firm, did not file its return of income. Upon receiving information about GST declarations and cash deposits, the AO reopened the assessment. The assessee eventually filed a return, but due to lack of proper details, income was estimated. The CIT(A) sustained the addition ex-parte as the assessee did not respond to notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case before the AO, considering the circumstances and the need for natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: MS. PADMAVATHY.S & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI

For Respondent: Mr. Gautam S. Mukundan, JCIT

आदेश / O R D E R

PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short "CIT(A)") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") dated 24.12.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21.

2.

The assessee is a firm and did not file the return of income. The A.O received information that the assessee has declared substantial amount as revenue in the GST return and that the assessee has also deposited cash in the

ITA No.1248/Chny/2026 M/s. Tharagai Matching :- 2 -:

bank account. Since the assessee did not file the return of income, the A.O reopened the assessment. In response, the assessee filed the return of income declaring total income of Rs. 4,16,690/-. Since the assessee could not file proper details before the A.O, the addition was made by estimating the income at 12% of the gross receipts amounting to Rs. 69,06,760/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The assessee did not respond to the various notice issued by the CIT(A), and therefore the CIT(A) sustained the addition ex-parte.

3.

There is a delay of 02 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. Having heard both the parties and perused the material on record, we are of the view that there is a reasonable and sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore following the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST.Katiji & Ors., (167 ITR 471) (SC), we condone the delay in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

4.

We have heard the parties, and perused the material available on record. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee is not aware of the income tax proceedings and completely relied on his counsel for handling the tax matters. The Ld. AR further submitted that the counsel of the assessee did not provide proper professional support and therefore the assessee could not represent the case properly before the lower authorities. The ld. AR accordingly prayed for one more opportunity. Considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to assessee's case, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee in the interest of natural justice to represent the case properly by producing the

ITA No.1248/Chny/2026 M/s. Tharagai Matching :- 3 -:

required details. Accordingly, we remit the appeal back to the A.O with the direction to call for necessary details and decide the issue in accordance with law. The assessee is required to submit the necessary details as may be called for and cooperate with assessment proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

5.

Further, we also levy a cost of Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand only) in the appeal since considerable time and efforts have been spent by the Exchequer and for the reason that the assessee being delinquent before the lower authorities. The same shall be paid by the assessee to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order and produce the receipt before the A.O.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 14th day of May, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (मनु कुमार िग#र) (पदमावती यस) (Manu Kumar Giri) (Padmavathy.S) �याियक सद�य �याियक सद�य / Judicial Member लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य �याियक �याियक सद�य सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 14th May, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S

ITA No.1248/Chny/2026 M/s. Tharagai Matching :- 4 -:

आदेश क� �ितिल�प 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

EJTADA Digitally signed by EJTADA DURGA NARESH DURGA Date: 2026.06.01 NARESH 12:42:25 +05'30'

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →