BRITTO EXPORTS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE-4(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2338/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 October 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member), SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the interest of justice, decided to set aside the appeals to the file of the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, granting the assessee one more opportunity to present relevant evidence and arguments.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals arose from orders of the CIT(A) concerning assessment year 2017-18. The Assessing Officer made additions and imposed penalties under various sections of the Income Tax Act. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeals after proceeding on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present evidence before the CIT(A) after failing to appear previously, and whether the CIT(A) adequately considered the submissions filed before the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 271A,Section 271B,Section 272A(1)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

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

Hearing: 22.10.2025Pronounced: 27.10.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

1.

These appeals by the assessee are arising out of the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in all orders dated 11.07.2025. The assessment was framed by the Assessing Officer, NFAC, Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18 u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’), vide orders dated 26.03.2022 and respective penalties u/s 271A, 271B and 272A(1)(d). to 2341/Chny/2025 (AY 2017-18) Britto Exports :: 2 ::

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the AO made addition of Rs.91,16,431/- u/s.147 r.w.s.144 and also imposed penalties u/s 271A, 271B and 272A(1)(d) of the Act. Aggrieved by the addition and penalties, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). However, before the ld.CIT(A), assessee didn’t appear, hence the ld.CIT(A) proceeded on merits and partly allowed the appeals and upheld the order of AO and penalties. Hence, assessee is further in appeals before us.

3.

Before us also, the ld. Counsel submitted that while adjudicating the matter the ld. CIT(A) has not noticed/considered the submissions filed before the AO. He further pleaded for one more opportunity to file the evidence/submissions before the CIT(A). The Ld. Addl. CIT-DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeals on the ground that the assessee has not filed supporting evidences with regard to the addition before the ld. CIT(A).

4.

We have gone through the orders of lower authorities and submission addressed by the ld. Departmental Representative. We are of the considered view that in the interest of justice, assessee should be given one more opportunity before the ld.CIT(A) to file all relevant evidences/documents to prosecute his cases. Therefore, in the light of aforesaid factual position, we deem it fit to set aside these appeals to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for de novo adjudication of appeals. The Ld.CIT(A) who shall proceed for de novo adjudication of appeals after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to to 2341/Chny/2025 (AY 2017-18) Britto Exports substantiate its case forthwith without any fail, failing which, the Ld.CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appellate proceedings as per law.

5.

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced on the 27th day of October, 2025, in Chennai.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →