ARULMIGU SIVASUBRAMANIASWAMY THIRUKOIL,DHARMAPURI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD, , SALEM

ITA 934/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 June 2026AY 2018-197 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee, a temple, failed to file its return of income. The Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings based on cash deposits and interest income, making additions for excess receipts and unexplained cash deposits. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) is duty-bound to dispose of an appeal on merits, even if dismissed ex-parte for non-prosecution. Dismissing an appeal solely for non-prosecution without considering the merits is contrary to the law.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without deciding the appeal on merits. Whether the reassessment proceedings and additions made by the AO are legally valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 148A,Section 148,Section 250(6),Section 12A(1)(ac)(i),Section 10(23BBA)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHENNAI BENCHES, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI

Pronounced: 24.06.2026

PER INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the Assessee directed against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], dated 15.01.2026 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. 1 ARULMIGU SIVASUBRAMANIASWAMY THIRUKOIL

2.

The Assessee raised the following grounds of appeal : “1) The Impugned Order is bad, erroneous and unsustainable in law.

2) The Learned Commissioner (Appeals) er

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 7,954 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →