What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was required to discuss the issues on merits, which was not done. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

The assessee's appeals were filed with a minor delay, which was condoned. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's grounds ex parte for non-compliance with notices without discussing the merits of the case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without adjudicating the grounds on merits.

Janakiraman Santhanam vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2026

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

Hearing: 15.06.2026Pronounced: 30.06.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ ए’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ 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. Nos.1915, 1916 & 1917/Chny/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2023-24

Jankiraman Sathanam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 23/2, Ambattur, Tiruvallur, Non-Corp Circle -7(1), Ambattur H.O, Chennai, Chennai-606751. Tamil Nadu, 600053. [PAN: AIOPS8919C] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Mr. K. Vishva Padmanabhan, C.A. ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Mr. Manoj Prakash, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 15.06.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 30.06.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

These three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the order dated 06.01.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment years 2023-24.

Since, the issues raised in these appeals are similar based on the same identical facts, with the consent of both the parties, we proceed to

I.T.A. Nos. 1915, 1916 & 1917/Chny/26 2

hear all the appeals together and pass consolidated order for the sake of convenience.

-:I.T.A. No.1915/Chny/2026:- (Assessment Year: 2023-24) 3. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 02 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find that the reasons stated by the assessee are bona fide, which really prevented the filing of the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.

At the outset, it is noted that the assessee is an individual who filed the return of income declaring a total income of ₹1,07,34,560, and the AO, on scrutiny assessment, determined the income of the assessee at ₹2,29,99,352, inter alia, making several disallowances, which is evident from page Nos. 6 to 8 of the assessment order, against which the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), wherein the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the grounds of the assessee ex parte for non- compliance with the notices, which is evident from page Nos. 9 to 11 of the impugned order.

5 Ld. AR, Mr. K. Vishva Padmanabhan, C.A., submitted that the assessee is ready to prosecute his case and is ready with the evidence in support of the grounds raised before the ld. CIT(A). He pleaded for one more opportunity to the assessee as the assessee has a fair case to succeed before the ld. CIT(A).

Ld. DR, Mr. Manoj Prakash, JCIT, did not dispute the same.

I.T.A. Nos. 1915, 1916 & 1917/Chny/26 3

Having heard both the parties and taking into account the facts and circumstances with reference to the submissions of the ld. AR and DR, we note that the ld. CIT(A) issued three notices, which is evident from page Nos. 8 and 9 of the impugned order, wherein he recorded that no compliance was made by the assessee with reference to the said notices. The ld. CIT(A) proceeded to dismiss the grounds ex parte of the assessee by following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Multiplan (India) Pvt. Ltd., 38 ITD 320, which is evident from page No. 9 of the impugned order. Therefore, it is clear that there was no discussion on merits by the ld. CIT(A), but, however, he proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee ex parte without discussing the issues on merits, which is the requirement of the law. Thus, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for his fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of his claim. Thus, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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

-:I.T.A. No.1916/Chny/2026:- (Assessment Year: 2023-24) 9. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 02 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really

I.T.A. Nos. 1915, 1916 & 1917/Chny/26 4

prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admit the appeal for adjudication.

10.

We find that in the present appeal also, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the ground of the assessee ex parte. Since we have taken a decision in appeal ITA No.1915/Chny/2026 in the aforementioned paragraphs and remanded the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A), which is equally applicable in this appeal also, accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is set aside. The matter is remanded to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for his fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of his claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

11.

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

-:I.T.A. No. 1917/Chny/2026:- (Assessment Year: 2023-24) 12. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 02 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admit the appeal for adjudication.

13.

I.T.A. Nos. 1915, 1916 & 1917/Chny/26 5

applicable in this appeal also, accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is set aside. The matter is remanded to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for his fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of his claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

14.

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

Order pronounced on 30th June, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 30.06.2026 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.

JANAKIRAMAN SANTHANAM,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments