PARMAR DEVELOPERS AND PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), CHENNAI

ITA 1117/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 April 2026AY 2015-163 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the assessee's plea of not being aware of the proceedings due to counsel's lack of support, decided to grant one more opportunity. The appeal was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee company's name appeared as a beneficiary of bogus accommodation entries. The Assessing Officer treated Rs. 85,00,000/- as undisclosed income due to the assessee's failure to reply to a show cause notice. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the appellate authorities, given the circumstances of non-representation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

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 PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Bengaluru (in short "FAA") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") dated 31.12.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16.

The assessee is a private limited company and filed the return of income on 18.05.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 1,38,68,320/-. The case

ITA No.1117/Chny/2026 Parmar Developers and Properties Pvt. Ltd. :- 2 -:

was selected for scrutiny and the statutory notices were duly served on the assessee. The A.O received information from ADIT (Invt.) with respect to beneficiaries who availed bogus accommodation entries in the form of bogus bills and the assessee's name is stated as one of the beneficiaries. The A.O accordingly issued a show cause notice to the assessee in this regard. Since the assessee did not file any reply to the show cause notice, the A.O completed the assessment treating a sum of Rs. 85,00,000/- as undisclosed income of the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) confirmed the addition ex-parte stating that the assessee has failed to substantiate the transaction or rebut the findings of the investigation wing. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A).

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 was not aware that the A.O has passed the assessment order. 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 to represent the case properly by producing the required details. Accordingly, we remit the appeal back to the CIT(A) 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 appellate proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

ITA No.1117/Chny/2026 Parmar Developers and Properties Pvt. Ltd. :- 3 -:

Further, we also levy a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Ten 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 CIT(A).

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 21st day of April, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज� जॉज� के) (पदमावती यस) (Padmavathy.S) (George George K) उपा�� / Vice President लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 21st April, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S 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 DURGA NARESH Date: 2026.04.27 NARESH 12:56:22 +05'30'

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →