PALANI RADHAKRISHNAN,DHARMAPURI vs. ITO, WARD-1,, DHARMAPURI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1160/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 June 2025AY 2021-22Bench: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI (Judicial Member), SHRI JAGADISH (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the orders of the AO and CIT(A) due to lack of proper opportunity of being heard for the assessee. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits after affording the assessee due opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a proprietor of transport and trading businesses, had expenses disallowed by the AO at 5% as the declared net profit was only 1.5%. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to non-submission of written arguments.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without affording a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI JAGADISH

Hearing: 17.06.2025Pronounced: 27.06.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 28.02.2025 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 19.12.2022.

2.

The assessee is a proprietor of M/s. Jaisakthi Transport and M/s.

1.

Sri Jaisakthi Traders, engaged in the business of tyre trading and also in the transportation of food grains as a sub-contractor. The A.O completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Act (hereinafter "the Act") and disallowed 5% of the total expenses, as the net profit declared was only 1.5%. Aggrieved by the disallowance, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order stating that the assessee had not filed any written submissions.

3.

The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R) of the assessee has submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without providing property opportunity of being heard and therefore, requested 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) has confirmed the disallowance made by the A.O solely on account of non-compliance by the assessee, 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. 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 27th day of June, 2025 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →