SB ENTERPRISES,NAGAPATTINAM vs. ITO, NCW-15(1), CHENNAI

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’
यायपीठ, चे ई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

ी मनु कुमार िग र, ाियक सद एवं
एवं
एवं
एवं

ी एस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखा सद के सम

BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2344/Chny/2025
िनधारण वष/Assessment Year: 2017-18
M/s. SB Enterprises,
34/11, Periamanaveli Street,
Korainadu, Mayiladuthurai,
Nagapatinam-609 001. v.
The ITO,
Non-Corporate Ward-15(1),
Chennai.
[PAN: ACIFS 3406 J]

(अपीलाथ/Appellant)

(यथ/Respondent)

अपीलाथ क ओर से/ Appellant by :
Mr.Bhupendran, Advocate
यथ क ओर से /Respondent by :
Mr.Krishna Murthy AT, JCIT
सुनवाईकतारीख/Date of Hearing
:
22.10.2025
घोषणाकतारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
27.10.2025

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. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT(A), Prayagraj,
[CIT(A)] dated 18.11.2024 for Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee brought to our notice that the appeal has been filed belatedly by ‘206’ days and assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the cause for the delay. Having gone through the M/s. SB Enterprises
:: 2 ::

contents of the same, we find that cause for delay was reasonable, so we excuse the same and proceed to hear the assessee’s appeal on merits.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the AO made addition of Rs.4,24,428/- u/s.69 of the Act. Aggrieved by the addition, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). However, before the ld.CIT(A), assessee didn’t appear, hence the ld.CIT(A) proceeded on merits and dismissed the appeal and upheld the orders of AO. Hence, assessee is further in appeal before us.
4. Before us also, the ld. Counsel submitted that while adjudicating the matter the ld. CIT(A) has not considered the evidences filed before the AO. He further pleaded for one more opportunity to file the evidence before the CIT(A). The Ld. Addl. CIT-DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal on the ground that the assessee has not filed supporting evidences with regard to the addition before the ld. CIT(A).
5. 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 the appeal to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for de novo adjudication of appeal. The Ld.CIT(A) who shall proceed for de novo adjudication of appeal after providing proper
M/s. SB Enterprises
:: 3 ::

opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to 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.
6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced on the 27th day of October, 2025, in Chennai. (एस. आर. रघुनाथा)
(S.R.RAGHUNATHA)
लेखा सदय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (मनु कुमार िग र)
(MANU KUMAR GIRI)
याियक सदय/JUDICIAL MEMBER
चे ई/Chennai,
!दनांक/Dated: 27th October, 2025. TLN

आदेश क ितिलिप अ$ेिषत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ /Appellant
2. थ /Respondent
3. आयकरआयु/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore.