ARCH TECH BUILDING MATERIALS PRIVATE LIMITED,CUDDALORE vs. ITO, WARD 1, CUDDALORE, CUDDALORE

ITA 4044/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 March 2026AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K (Vice President), SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that notices were not properly served upon the appellant as they were issued through the ITBA Portal, which is not a valid method of service. Relying on a High Court judgment, the Tribunal found the service invalid and the assessment proceedings flawed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in trading floor tiles, did not file a regular return for AY 2015-16. The AO initiated assessment proceedings based on cash deposits in the assessee's bank account, issuing notices under section 148A and 148 of the Act. The assessee did not comply, leading to a best judgment assessment under section 144.

What were the issues?

Whether notices issued through the ITBA portal constitute proper service of notice under the Income Tax Act, 1961, and if not, whether the assessment proceedings are vitiated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 139,Section 148A,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 282(1),Section 127(1),Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHENNAI BENCH “D”, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE- & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO

For Appellant: Mr. R Vijayaraghavan – Advocate
For Respondent: Ms. V Awasthy – JCIT
Hearing: 17/02/2026Pronounced: 11/03/2026

PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)[NFAC] Delhi [‘the CIT(A)’] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 08.10.2025 for the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2

2.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in the business trading of Floor Tiles. No regular return of income under the provisions of section 139 of the Act, was f

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 139

All 3,629 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →