VIJAYA SAMUDEESWARI KARTHIKEYAN,SALEM vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), SALEM

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and did not file her return of income for AY 2018-19. As per information available with the department, the AO found that the assessee has sold immovable property to the tune of Rs.95,00,000/- and the assessee has also deposited cash of Rs.36,62,500/- in the bank account maintained with Syndicate Bank during the assessment year. The case was re-opened u/s.147 of the Act, a notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. In response, the assessee has filed her return of income on 26.05.2022 for A.Y 2018-19, declaring total income of Rs.2,99,410/- as per the provisions of section 44AD of the Act. Further, the AO issued statutory notices to the assessee and by calling for details. Since the assessee chose to be silent and did not respond to the any of the notices, the AO completed the reassessment by passing an order u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Act dated 15.03.2024 by making an addition of Rs.80,04,000/- as long term

Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) on 18.03.2024. 5. At the outset, we observed that the ld.CIT(A) has provided three opportunities for the assessee to appear for hearings as detailed in paragraph 5.3 of the ld.CIT(A) order to support the appeal of the assessee. However, the assessee chose to be silent and did not respond to any of the notices and hence, the ld.CIT(A), NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by confirming the order of the AO by passing an order dated 16.12.2024. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before us.

The ld.AR submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has passed order by dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee due to non-participation of the assessee in the appellate proceedings. Further, the ld.AR of the assessee stated that the Assessing Officer also has passed an exparte order without consideration of the return of income filed by the assessee. In view of the above, the ld.AR prayed that the Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the order of ld.CIT(A) and remit the issues to the file of AO. Further, ld.AR assured the bench that the ld.AR will represent on behalf of the assessee before the AO to complete the assessment proceedings effectively.

Per contra, the ld.DR submitted that the assessee has been negligent in responding to the statutory notices and hence, prayed for confirming the order of the ld.CIT(A).

We have heard the rival parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the lower authorities. We note that the :-4-: ITA. No:1507/Chny/2026. AO has passed an order by considering the part submission made by the assessee and the information available with the department and the same has been confirmed by the ld.CIT(A), NFAC due to non-participation of the assessee. Since, the assessee has failed to participate before the AO as well as the first appellate authority, we levy the cost of Rs.10,000/- to be paid to State Legal Aid Authority, Hon’ble High Court of Madras within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order and the assessee shall satisfy the payment of cost before the authorities.

In view of the above and to meet the ends of justice we set aside the order of ld.CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of AO and direct the AO to denovo frame the assessment order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee to be diligent and file written submissions and relevant documents if advised so.

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