What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found it appropriate to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The assessee was granted liberty to file evidence and represent the case without fail.

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's non-representation. The assessee's counsel requested one more opportunity to present the case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to represent their case before the CIT(A) after their initial appeal was dismissed for non-representation.

Murugan vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2026

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Hearing: 13.05.2026Pronounced: 29.05.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी इंटूरी रामाराव, लेखा सद� एवं �ी एस.एस. िव�ने� रिव, �ाियक सद� के सम� । Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1738/Chny/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2015-16 Murugan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 38, Kamarajan street Non- Corp Ward 3(3), Chennai, Vanniya, Teynampet,Tamil Nadu, Room No. 623D, Wanaparthy Block VI Chennai-600 018. Floor, Chennai. [PAN: AMTPM5031A] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. Varsha Jain, Advocate ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. T. Mythili, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 13.05.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 29.05.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.01.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2015-16.

We find that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee, which is evident from para No.5 of the impugned order, wherein it is noted that the ld. CIT(A) issued notices fixing the date of hearing and intimating

2 I.T.A. No.1738/Chny/26

the same to the assessee. Further, we find no representation on behalf of the assessee before the ld. CIT(A).

The ld. AR Ms. Varsha Jain, Advocate pleaded for one more opportunity and, considering the same, taking into account no objection from the ld. DR Ms. T. Mythili, CIT, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for his fresh consideration. The assessee shall represent his case without fail and is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of his claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

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

Order pronounced on 29th May, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 29.05.2026 MM/- आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant, 2.��थ�/ Respondent,

3 I.T.A. No.1738/Chny/26

आयकर आयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड� फाईल/GF.

MURUGAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO NON CORP WARD 3(3), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments