DHANDAPANI PERUMAL,DINDIGUL vs. ITO, WARD-1,, DINDIGUL

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

The captioned online appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, [CIT(A)] dated 27.01.2026 for Assessment Year 2017- 18. 2. Appellant is an individual assessee engaging in the sale of rice business under the name and style of M/s. Annalakshmi traders, Dindigul. Appellant’s Case was re-opened to verify the information about cash deposit of Rs.25,79,515/- in Catholic Syrian Bank and

ITA No 1292/Chny/2026 (AY 2017-18) Dhandapani Perumal Vs ITO, W(1) :: 2 :: cash withdrawal of Rs.52,93,194/- from Catholic Syrian Bank who did not file his return of income for the year under consideration. Subsequently, the assessing officer issued notice u/s 148, 142(1) and show cause notices through ITBA. Appellant participated in the Assessment proceedings and furnished the called for details. Finally, the Assessing officer completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s 144 read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act on 25.02.2025, treating the net profit and total income of the appellant of Rs.14,50,491/- (by way of computing @15 Percentage of total turnover of Rs. 96,69,941/-). 3. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), claimed that the AO erred to treat the net profit and total income of the appellant of Rs.14,50,491/- (by way of computing @15 Percentage of total turnover of Rs. 96,69,941/-). But the Ld. CIT(A) vide its order dated 27.01.2026 dismissed the appeal of the assessee by stating the reasons that that the assessee remained non-compliant during assessment proceedings despite repeated opportunities. 4. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Ld CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before this Tribunal sought an opportunity to file the relevant/necessary documents required by the notices. The appellant stated that notice was not acknowledged by him and could not hand over to the auditor which caused the inadvertent non-prosecution of appeal. 5. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. We observe that the order of the CIT(A) had been passed without

ITA No 1292/Chny/2026 (AY 2017-18) Dhandapani Perumal Vs ITO, W(1) :: 3 :: providing the assessee an effective opportunity of being heard during the appellate proceedings. It is settled law that the principles of natural justice require that adequate and reasonable opportunity be afforded before adjudicating the appeal. Since no proper notice of hearing/opportunity was provided to the assessee, the appellate order suffered from violation of principles of natural justice. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter to the file of ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal denovo after granting adequate opportunity of hearing and considering the submissions/evidence that may be furnished by the assessee. The assessee is also directed to diligently to participate in the appellate proceedings. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on the 03rd day of June 2026, in

Sd/- Sd/- (प�ावती एस) (मनु कुमार िग#र) (PADMAVATHY S) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) लेखा सद$या/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER %या�यक सद$य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे%नई/Chennai, 'दनांक/Dated: 03rd June, 2026. SNDP, Sr. PS

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