ROBERTSON KOILRAJ,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-1(6), CHENNAI

The assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of buying and selling of high end cars. The assessee filed a return of income for AY 2018- 19 on 30.08.2018 declaring total income of Rs.8,03,270/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the statutory notices were duly served on the assessee. The A.O completed the assessment assessing the income of the assessee at Rs.1,94,57,410/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). Since the assessee did not respond to the various notices issued by the CIT(A), the additions/disallowances made by the A.O was confirmed ex-parte by the CIT(A). The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A).

We have heard the parties, and perused the material available on record. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the notices issued by the CIT(A) were sent with the wrong e mail ID which does not belonging to the assessee. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee is a cancer survivor and is having lot of health issues due to which he is unable to concentrate on the income tax matters. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee therefore is fully dependent on his counsel for tax related proceedings and the counsel did not handle the matters properly. The Ld. AR accordingly prayed for one more opportunity. Considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to assessee's case, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee to represent the case properly by producing the required details. Accordingly, we remit the appeal back to the CIT(A) with the direction to call for necessary details and decide the issue in accordance with law. The assessee is required to submit the necessary details as may be called for and cooperate with appellate proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 13th day of May, 2026 at Chennai.