SHREE RAASI ASSOCIATES,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, WARD-1,, NAMAKKAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1073/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 June 2025AY 2022-23Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI JAGADISH (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without adjudicating the issue on merits. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the AO and CIT(A) and remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits after providing due opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in real estate and construction, was disallowed a deduction of Rs.1,20,000/- under section 143(1) of the Act. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who passed an ex-parte order without adjudicating on merits because the assessee failed to provide documentary evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order without adjudicating the appeal on merits, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 40(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI JAGADISH

Hearing: 18.06.2025Pronounced: 27.06.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23 arises out of the orders of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/JCIT(A), Panaji [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 20.03.2025.

2.

The assessee is engaged in the business of real estate and allied construction activities. The CPC, Bengaluru vide intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act, disallowed a deduction claimed u/s. 40(b) amounting to Rs.1,20,000/-. Aggrieved by the disallowance, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) passed order ex-parte without adjudicating the issue on merits as the assessee failed to provide documentary evidence in support of his case.

3.

The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had passed order ex-parte without adjudicating the issue on merits therefore, one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to substantiate his case before the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), relied on the orders of lower authorities.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the Ld. CIT(A) had decided the issue, without adjudicating the issue on merits. Accordingly, we set aside the orders passed by the A.O and the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld.

1.

CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits. The Ld. CIT(A) shall pass a reasoned order after providing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee, in accordance with law. We also direct the assessee to co- operate with the proceedings and appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on the date of hearing without fail. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.

6.

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

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

More judgments on Section 40(b)

All 428 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →