PATTABIRAMAN ANBAZHAGAN,VELLORE vs. ITO, WARD-1,, VELLORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2597/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 November 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had a sufficient cause for not responding to the notices. The impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for hearing on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) which dismissed their appeal. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal for non-appearance and non-response to notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee had a sufficient cause for not responding to the notices issued by the CIT(A) and whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) should be set aside.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C,Section 69C,Section 282

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 26.11.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld.

1.

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC) Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 08.07.2025 for Assessment Year 2020-21. ld.CIT(A) against the income assessed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 144C of the Act on account of unexplained expenditure of Rs.30,23,310/- u/s 69C of the Act.

However, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte as the assessee has neither appeared nor filed any response to the notices issued for hearing.

Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

3.

Before the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has only uploaded the notices on the e-portal but while issuing notices has not complied with the section 282 of the Act. The ld.DR relied upon the order of the ld.CIT(A) and pleaded for the dismissal of the appeal.

4.

Though we some extent concur with the submissions of Ld.DR Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT, JCIT however, keeping in mind the reasons given, we are of the view that the reason given by the assessee for not responding the notices of the CIT(A) a sufficient cause. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for hearing on merits subject to cost of Rs.5,000/- which shall be deposited by the assessee preferably within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order to ‘Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority’ at Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The proof of the same will be appeal on merits after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The assessee is directed to substantiate its case with all evidence and documents, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which Ld.CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appeal proceedings on merits as per law.

5.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced on 26th day of November, 2025 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 144C

All 3,699 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →