THE TIRUVANNAMALAI COOP URBAN BANK LTD.,TIRUVANNAMALAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1,, VELLORE
आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘बी’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ के, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदèय के सम¢
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENTAND
SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 2016/CHNY/2025
िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2017-18
The Tiruvannamalai Co-op
Urban Bank Ltd.,
87/18, Sannadhi Street,
Tiruvannamalai – 606 601. PAN: AAEFT 9897Q
Vs.
The Income Tax Officer,
Circle 1,
Vellore
(अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant)
(ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent)
अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Abhishek Murali, C.A ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam,JCIT
सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18.09.2025
घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 18.09.2025
आदेश/ O R D E R
PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal
Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 26.03.2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant
Assessment Year is 2017-18. :- 2 -:
2. There is a delay of 51 days in filing the appeal. The Managing
Director of the assessee society, has filed a petition for condonation of delay stating there in the reason for belated filing of this appeal.
The reason stated is that the assessee had not received the order passed by the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The assessee came to know about the order passed by the FAA, only upon receipt of postal copy of the show-cause notice dated 19.06.2025 initiating proceeding u/s.270A of the Act. Since, the assessee was unaware of the order passed being passed, it could not file the appeal within the time. On perusal of the reason stated, we find there is sufficient cause for delay in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.
At the very outset, we notice that the order of First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to the various notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority.
The Ld.AR submitted that the FAA had dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing an ex-parte order stating that the assessee has not responded to the hearing notices and was not able to defend its case by making any written :- 3 -: submission/evidence in support of its case. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has filed detailed explanation objecting the addition made by the AO along with the appeal filed before the FAA. The Ld.AR further submitted that the FAA without adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee and without considering the explanation filed along with the appeal, by reiterating the AO’s order, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Since the order of the FAA is ex-parte and also a non-speaking order, it was prayed in the interest of justice and equity, the issue may be restored to the files of the FAA as a last opportunity for proper representation of its case.
The ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the office of the FAA and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was prayed the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceedings before FAA was ex-parte, since the assessee did not respond to various notices issued. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices issued from the offices of the FAA. The Ld.AR submitted that the FAA had dismissed the assessee’s :- 4 -: appeal without considering the detailed explanation filed along with the appeal. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that the matter ought to be restored to the files of the FAA. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the files of the FAA for fresh adjudication. The FAA shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18th September, 2025 at Chennai. (एस.आर. रघुनाथा)
(S.R. RAGHUNATHA)
लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
(जॉज[ जॉज[ के)
(GEORGE GEORGE K)
उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT
चे᳖ई/Chennai,
ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 18th September, 2025
RSR
आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant
Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Chennai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR
गाड[ फाईल/GF.