AYYAPPAN CHANDRASEKARAN,MADURAI vs. ITO, NCW-10(6), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1617/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2026AY 2022-234 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 the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 15,000 to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to respond to multiple notices issued by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) and the Assessing Officer (AO), leading to ex-parte proceedings and a best judgment assessment. The assessee's representative sought one last opportunity to present the case.

What were the issues?

Whether to grant a last opportunity to an assessee who failed to comply with statutory notices, despite ex-parte proceedings and best judgment assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & MS PADMAVATHY S

Hearing: 14.05.2026Pronounced: 15.05.2026

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 26.02.2026 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2022-23.

- 2 - ITA No.1617/CHNY/2026 Ayyappan Chandrasekaran

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 five notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. Further, we also note that the assessment has been completed on best judgment basis r.w.s.144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act.

3.

The ld.AR submitted that the assessee failed to take note of the notices issued by the FAA & AO and hence, remained ex-parte. The Ld.AR undertook that he would duly appear and furnish the necessary details as and when called for. The Ld. AR, only pleaded that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee and the matter be restored to the file of the AO, 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 & AO 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.1617/CHNY/2026 Ayyappan Chandrasekaran 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 his 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 & AO. 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.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only) to be paid to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The amount of Rs.15,000/- 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.1617/CHNY/2026 Ayyappan Chandrasekaran support of his 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 15th May,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 15th May, 2026 RSR, Sr.PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Madurai 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF. By Order Digitally signed by REKHA REKHA SENTHIL RAJ SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.05.18 17:11:07 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →