What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The assessee was directed to appear and present their case with supporting evidence.

The assessee's appeal was filed against an ex parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee's counsel requested one more opportunity to present the case before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) after an ex parte order was passed.

Kalimuthu Loganathan, Tirupur vs DCIT | ITAT Chennai 2026

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

Hearing: 13.05.2026Pronounced: 15.05.2026

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.01.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment year 2022-23. 2. We find no dispute with reference to order of ld. CIT(A) in passing the same ex parte of the assessee by the ld. AR Ms. Srinithi, Advocate, and ld. DR Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT, which is evident from para No. 6 of the impugned order.

Ld. AR prayed to afford one more opportunity to the assessee in remanding the matter to the file of ld. CIT(A) for his fresh consideration. Further, it was stated to record undertaking on behalf of the assessee to appear before ld. CIT(A) in compliance to the notice issued therein. Considering the submissions of ld. AR and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of ld. CIT(A) for his fresh consideration. Assessee shall represent his case without fail and is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of his claim. Thus, 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 15th May, 2026 at Chennai. Chennai, Dated, 15.05.2026 MM/- आदेश की "ितिलिप 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.

KALIMUTHU LOGANATHAN,TIRUPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, TIRUPPUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments