USHA RAJENDHAR ,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CENTRAL CIRCLE II(5), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals for non-prosecution without considering the merits. One more opportunity was granted to the assessee to present her case.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer made additions based on sundry creditors and incentive payments. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeals for non-prosecution without discussing the merits.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeals for non-prosecution without delving into the merits of the 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 ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid two appeals filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AYs) 2001-02 & 2005-06 arises out of the orders of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, Chennai-19 [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] both dated 05.08.2024.
The facts in both the appeals of the assessee are identical and issues are common hence, we proceed to pass a common order.
1. & 2625/Chny/2025 Usha Rajendhar :- 2 -: 3. The A.O, in the order passed u/s. 153C of the Act, made an addition on account of sundry creditors amounting to Rs. 31,99,997/- and incentive payments of Rs. 42,90,000/- for A.Y 2001-02 and Rs.2,16,51,476 in A.Y 2005-06 . Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) issued several notices, which remained un-complied with by the assessee. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals for non-prosecution.
At the outset, the Learned Authorized Representative (Ld. A.R.)
submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals for non- prosecution without discussing the issues on merits. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee now undertakes that she is in possession of all relevant records and is willing to fully cooperate in the proceedings. Therefore, it was prayed that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to substantiate her case before the A.O.
The Ld. Departmental Representative (Ld. D.R.), on the other hand, relied on the orders of the lower authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the orders of the Ld. CIT(A), it is observed that the appeals were dismissed for non-prosecution without & 2625/Chny/2025 Usha Rajendhar :- 3 -: discussing the issues on merits. However, the Ld. A.R. has now explained the reasons for such non-compliance and has assured that the assessee is ready to submit the required information. Considering the submissions and in the interest of justice, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be granted to the assessee to substantiate her cases. Accordingly, we remit the matters back to the files of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to comply with all notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) and furnish all relevant details for proper consideration. In view of the above, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 28th day of November, 2025 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 153C
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 874/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Ajay Singh, Kota vs DCIT, Central Circle, KotaITA 495/JPR/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Dineshkumar Chhaganlal Manavadaria, Junagadh vs ITO Ward 1, JunagadhITA 837/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026