JEGADEESAN ARUN,SIVAKASI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-1,, MADURAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1094/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 April 2026AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay due to sufficient cause. While deprecating the assessee's attitude, the Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication in the interest of justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 57 days due to severe health issues. The original assessment and the first appellate order were passed ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the ex-parte orders passed by the lower authorities should be set aside to provide an opportunity to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND MS PADMAVATHY S

Hearing: 22.04.2026Pronounced: 28.04.2026

आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 08.10.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2018-19.

2.

There is a delay of 57 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has filed a petition seeking condonation of the delay along

:- 2 -: ITA No.1094/Chny/2026 with supporting affidavit, explaining the reasons for the delay. It is submitted that the assessee was suffering from acute intervertebral disc prolapse accompanied by severe and incapacitating back pain. Upon medical consultation, he was advised complete and strict bed rest for a continuous period of two months. In support of the same, the assessee has also furnished a medical certificate. Consequently, the assessee was unable to travel to Chennai to meet his counsel and take necessary steps in connection with the filing of the appeal. On perusal of the reasons stated, we are of the view that no latches can be attributed to the assessee as there is sufficient cause for belated filing of this appeal. Hence, we condone the delay and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.

3.

At the very outset, we notice that the order of First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to six notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. Further, we also note that the assessment has been completed on best judgment basis r.w.s.147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act.

4.

The ld.AR submitted that due to health issues, the assessee failed to take note of the notices issued by the FAA and hence, remained ex- parte. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessment has also been completed on best judgment basis. The Ld. AR, only pleaded that one

:- 3 -: ITA No.1094/Chny/2026 more opportunity be granted to the assessee and the matter be restored to the file of the AO, so as to enable the assessee to effectively present his case.

5.

The Ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the FAA & AO and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was submitted that the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.

6.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceedings before the AO as well as the FAA were ex- parte, since the assessee did not respond to various notices issued from the office of the AO & FAA. The Ld. AR submitted that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to represent his case before the AO and undertook that he would duly appear and furnish the necessary details as and when called for. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the statutory notices issued by the FAA & AO. However, considering the submissions of the Ld. AR and in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that the matter ought to be restored to the files of the AO as a last opportunity with a condition assessee pays a cost of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) to be paid to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The amount of Rs.15,000/- shall be paid within a month’s time from

:- 4 -: ITA No.1094/Chny/2026 the date of receipt of this order and assessee shall produce the receipt for the said payment before the AO. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the files of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and furnish all requisite details and evidences in support of his claim and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.

7.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 28th April, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (प�मावती एस) (जॉज� जॉज� के) (PADMAVATHY S) (GEORGE GEORGE K) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपा�य� /VICE PRESIDENT चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 28th April, 2026 RSR आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Madurai 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF. By Order Digitally signed by REKHA REKHA SENTHIL RAJ SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.04.30 10:24:55 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 147

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →