GURUSAMY PANDI,MADURAI vs. ITO, NCW-1(5), MADURAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2898/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 August 2026AY 2020-213 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the assessee's claim of lack of awareness and inadequate professional support, granted another opportunity for proper representation. The appeal was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a small agriculturist, failed to file a return of income. Information regarding cash and fixed deposits prompted the AO to reopen the assessment. The assessee filed a return but did not respond to notices from the AO and CIT(A), leading to ex-parte orders.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the appellate authorities due to alleged lack of awareness and professional support.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 147,Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & MS. PADMAVATHY.S

For Respondent: Ms. V.Supraja, Addl. CIT

आदेश / O R D E R

PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short "CIT(A)") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") dated 29.04.2026 for Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21.

2.

The assessee is an individual and is a small agriculturist engaged in flower cultivation and flower garland business. The assessee did not file the return of income for the year under consideration. The AO received information that during the year under consideration the assessee has made a

ITA No.2898/Chny/2026 Gurusamy Pandi :- 2 -: cash deposit of Rs. 17,07,000/- and has also has a fixed deposit of Rs.40,00,000/-. Since the assessee did not file the return of income, the A.O reopened the assessment by issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The assessee filed the return of income in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act declaring an income of Rs. 3,37,510/-. The assessee did not respond to any of the notices, the AO passed an order u/s. 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act assessing the income at Rs. 20,44,510/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). Since the assessee did not file any reply to the notices issued by the CIT(A), the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A).

3.

We have heard the parties, and perused the material available on record. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee is a small time flower vendor and is not aware of the income tax proceedings and completely relied on his counsel for handling the tax matters. The Ld. AR further submitted that the counsel of the assessee did not provide proper professional support and therefore the assessee could not represent the case properly before the lower authorities. The Ld. AR also submitted that the assessee has filed certain details with regard to the agricultural land, bank statements, copy of ITR etc. before the CIT(A) which has not been considered. The ld. AR accordingly prayed for one more opportunity with an undertaking that the assessee would represent the case properly. Considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to assessee's case, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee in the interest of natural justice and fair play to represent the case properly by producing the required details. Accordingly, we remit the appeal back to the CIT(A) with a direction to consider the details already submitted by the assessee and to call for any further necessary details to decide the issue in accordance with law.

ITA No.2898/Chny/2026 Gurusamy Pandi :- 3 -: The assessee is directed to submit the necessary details as may be called for and cooperate with appellate proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

4.

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

Order pronounced on 04th day of August, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/ Sd/ (जॉज� जॉज� के) (पदमावती यस) (Padmavathy.S) (George George K) उपा�� / Vice President लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 04th August, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S EJTADA Digitally signed by आदेश क� �ितिल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: EJTADA DURGA NARESH DURGA 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant Date: 2026.08.07 NARESH 17:58:55 +05'30' 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →