BGR INVESTMENT HOLDINGS COMPANY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 1(3), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1078/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 April 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, while deprecating the assessee's non-compliance, granted a last opportunity to present the case before the AO. This was subject to a cost of Rs. 25,000/- to be paid to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to comply with three notices issued by the First Appellate Authority (FAA), leading to an ex-parte order. The assessment was completed on a best judgment basis. The assessee requested one more opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte order passed by the FAA due to non-compliance should be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication, considering the assessee's plea for one last opportunity.

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: 20.04.2026Pronounced: 21.04.2026

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 18.12.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18.

:- 2 -: ITA No.1078/Chny/2026 2. 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 three notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. Further, we also note that the assessment has been completed on best judgment basis u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act.

3.

The ld.AR submitted that the hearing notices issued from the office of the FAA has been uploaded in the ITBA portal, which the assessee failed to take note of and hence, the assessee had not complied to the notices issued by the FAA. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessment has also been completed on best judgment basis. The Ld. AR, only pleaded that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee and the matter be restored to the file of the FAA, so as to enable the assessee to effectively present his case.

4.

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

:- 3 -: ITA No.1078/Chny/2026 5. 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 its 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. 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.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) to be paid to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The amount of Rs.25,000/- shall be paid within a month’s time from 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

:- 4 -: ITA No.1078/Chny/2026 support of its claim and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 21st 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 21st April, 2026 RSR आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Chennai 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF. By Order Digitally signed by REKHA REKHA SENTHIL RAJ SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.04.24 10:10:06 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →