GANESAN MANI (HUF),CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-15(2), CHENNAI

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

The captioned online appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, [CIT(A)] dated 16.07.2025 for Assessment Year 2011- 12. 2. The assessee HUF e-filed return of income for the Asst. Year 2011-12 belatedly on 15/03/2012 admitting NIL income. The case was selected for scrutiny and a notice u/s 143(2) dated 13/09/2012 was issued. The assessment u/s 143(3) of the IT Act was completed

ITA No 610/Chny/2026 (AY 2011-12) Ganesan Mani HUF Vs ITO NCW 15(2) :: 2 :: in this case on 21/02/2014 in determining the taxable total income of Rs.46,97,380/-, 3. Upon non-submission of relevant documents pertains to the issue, the AO upheld the addition of Rs. 53,35,871/-. 4. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) sought setting aside the assessment order for reasons that the AO failed to appreciate the claim of tax exemption/deduction u/s 54/54F and re-computation of long term capital gains on various facts and proper opportunity was not served upon the assessee. However, the Ld.CIT(A), vide its order dated 16.07.2025 dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of lack of sufficient documents to substantiate the claim. Hence, he confirmed the order of AO. 5. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before this Tribunal and sought an opportunity to file the relevant/necessary documents pursuant to impugned notices issued by AO. The Ld.AR for the assessee stated the AO and CIT(A) passed an exparte impugned order without giving proper opportunity of hearing and the appellant failed to furnish the supporting evidence in support of grounds of appeal. 6. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, supported the order of the ld.CIT(A) and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 7. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the order of the ld. CIT(A). In the interest of justice, we are of the view that the assessee should be granted a final opportunity to substantiate the issue under consideration. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. The ld. CIT(A) shall afford the

ITA No 610/Chny/2026 (AY 2011-12) Ganesan Mani HUF Vs ITO NCW 15(2) :: 3 :: assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to diligently prosecute the appeal and actively participate in the appellate proceedings. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on the 19th day of May 2026, in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (इंतूरी रामा राव) (मनु कुमार िग�र) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) लेखा सद*य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद*य/JUDICIAL MEMBER

चे�नई/Chennai, +दनांक/Dated: 19th May, 2026. SNDP, Sr. PS

आदेश क! ��त,ल-प अ.े-षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF