ZB91 THIRUKKADAIYUR PRIMARY AGRI COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,THIRUKKADAIYUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD (1), NAGAPATTINAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 221/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 August 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the inadvertent error and, in the interest of justice, restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to cooperate and furnish necessary details.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine because the wrong assessment order was inadvertently filed. The assessment itself was completed on a best judgment basis.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to an inadvertent filing error, or if the assessee should be granted an opportunity for fresh adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

Hearing: 27.08.2026Pronounced: 31.08.2026

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 09.10.2023 passed under section 250 of

ITA No.221/CHNY/2026 - 2 - ZB91 Thirukkadaiyur PACCS the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18.

2.

At the very outset, we notice that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground that the assessee had inadvertently mentioned/enclosed the assessment order pertaining to a different assessee in Form No.35 and, therefore, treated the appeal as infructuous. Further, we also note that the assessment has been completed on best judgment basis r.w.s.147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s.144B of the Act.

4.

Aggrieved by the order of the FAA, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. Before us, the assessee has raised various grounds; however, at the time of hearing, the Ld. AR pressed only Ground No.5. The Ld. AR submitted that the wrong assessment order was inadvertently filed before the FAA. He further submitted that the assessment was completed on best judgment basis and, therefore, prayed that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee by restoring the matter to the file of the AO for effective adjudication on merits. The Ld. AR undertook to duly appear before the AO and furnish all necessary details as and when called for.

ITA No.221/CHNY/2026 - 3 - ZB91 Thirukkadaiyur PACCS 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.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted position that the assessee had inadvertently filed the assessment order pertaining to a different assessee before the FAA, resulting in dismissal of the appeal in limine. We also note that the assessment in the present case was completed on best judgment basis u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to represent its case before the AO and undertook that he would duly appear and furnish the necessary details as and when called for. In light of the submissions of 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 FAA. Accordingly, the order of the FAA is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.

ITA No.221/CHNY/2026 - 4 - ZB91 Thirukkadaiyur PACCS

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 31st August,2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज� जॉज� के) (गगन गोयल) (GAGAN GOYAL) (GEORGE GEORGE K) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपा�य� /VICE PRESIDENT चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 31st August, 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: 2026.09.02 12:51:38 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →