SAKTHIS KITCHEN PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORP. WARD-6(3), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal, considering the assessee's submission of a management change leading to non-appearance, decided to grant one more opportunity. The appeal was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after calling for necessary details.
What were the facts?
The assessee company, engaged in food services and housekeeping, filed its return of income. The Assessing Officer made additions for low net profit and non-deduction of TDS. The CIT(A) confirmed these additions ex-parte as the assessee did not respond to notices.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing an opportunity to the assessee, and if the assessee should be granted a further opportunity to present its case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND MS. PADMAVATHY.S
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 02.01.2026 for Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24.
The assessee is a company engaged in the business of serving food to hostels and has also taken up contracts for housekeeping activities. The assessee filed a return of income for AY 2023-24 on 21.10.2023 declaring income u/s.115JB at Rs.1,31,73,055/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and
ITA No.1173/Chny/2026 Sakthis Kitchen Pvt. Ltd. :- 2 -:
the statutory notices were duly served on the assessee. The A.O completed the assessment by making an addition of Rs.1,08,97,304/- towards low net profit shown and addition on account of TDS not made on total purchases to the tune of Rs.8,87,010/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). Since the assessee did not respond to the notices, the CIT(A) completed the assessment ex-parte confirming the additions made by the A.O. 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 there is a management change due to which the assessee could not represent before the CIT(A). Accordingly, the Ld. AR 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 substantiate the claim by producing the required details. Accordingly we remit the appeal back to the CIT(A) with a 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.
Further, we also levy a cost of Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand only) in the appeal since considerable time and efforts have been spent by the Exchequer and for the reason that the assessee being delinquent before the lower authorities. The same shall be paid by the assessee to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order and produce the receipt before the CIT(A).
ITA No.1173/Chny/2026 Sakthis Kitchen Pvt. Ltd. :- 3 -:
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 22nd day of April, 2026 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज� जॉज� के) (पदमावती यस) (Padmavathy.S) (George George K) उपा�� / Vice President लेखा सद�य लेखा सद�य /Accountant Member लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 22nd April, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S आदेश क� �ितिल�प 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
Digitally signed by EJTADA DURGA EJTADA DURGA NARESH NARESH Date: 2026.05.05 16:50:41 +05'30'
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026