RATHINAVEL NEELAMBAL,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO WARD 2, NAMAKKAL, NAMAKKAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1736/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2026AY 2021-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the lack of representation before the CIT(A) and the need for proper assistance. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration, allowing the assessee to file evidence and comply with notices.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to comply with notices issued by the CIT(A), leading to an ex-parte order confirming the Assessing Officer's additions. The assessee then sought to prosecute their case and comply with future notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex-parte due to non-compliance should be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Hearing: 13.05.2026Pronounced: 15.05.2026

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. 1736/Chny/2026 िनधा(रण वष(/Assessment Year: 2021-22 Rathinavel Neelambal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 56/8B, Vengamedu, Ward-2, Velur, Naamakkal - 637 001. Namakkal - 638 182. [PAN: ANPPN-6371-D] (अपीलाथ+/Appellant) (,-थ+/Respondent) अपीलाथ+ की ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. Vardhini Karthick, Advocate ,-थ+ की ओर से/Respondent by Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 13.05.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 15.05.2026 : 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 09.02.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [herein after “CIT(A)] for the assessment year 2021-22.

2.

At the outset, the ld.AR, Ms. Vardhina karthick, Advocate, submits that the assessee did not make any compliances with the notices issued

2 I.T.A. No. I.T.A. No.1736 I.T.A. No. I.T.A. No. 1736 1736/Chny/ 1736 /Chny/ /Chny/2026 /Chny/ 2026 2026 2026

by the ld.CIT(A) and the order of the Assessing Officer [herein after ‘AO’]

was confirmed exparte of assessee. She submits that the assessee is

ready to prosecute his case and comply with the notices issued by the

ld.CIT(A) without fail and prayed to remand the matter to the file of the

ld.CIT(A).

3.

The ld.DR, Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT reported no objection.

4.

Having heard both the parties, we note that the AO made addition on

account of unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act which requires

assistance and representation on behalf of the assessee before the

ld.CIT(A) and admittedly, no representation was made before the

ld.CIT(A). Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case

and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to

the file of the ld.CIT(A) for a fresh consideration. The assessee is liberty

to file evidences, if any, in support of his claim and shall make compliance

to the notices issued by the ld.CIT(A) without fail. Thus, grounds raised

by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

3 I.T.A. No. I.T.A. No.1736 I.T.A. No. I.T.A. No. 1736 1736/Chny/ 1736 /Chny/ /Chny/2026 /Chny/ 2026 2026 2026

5.

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

purposes. Order pronounced on 15th May, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated: 15.05.2026 JPV आदेश की ,ितिलिप अ4ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ+/Appellant, 2.,-थ+/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु5/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय ,ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड( फाईल/GF.

PRASANNA Digitally signed by PRASANNA VANI JETTY VANI JETTY Date: 2026.05.19 16:19:32 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →