TACHIL PABLO,BANGALORE vs. ITO, NCW-22(6), TAMBARAM

Assessment Years: 2015-16 Tachil Pablo, Income Tax Officer, No.A51, 2nd Avenue, Non-Corp Ward-22(6) Anna Nagar E, Chennai. Chennai-600 102 [PAN: ALYPP7575Q] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Ms.Anitha, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 17.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 19.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2024-25 / 1073349421(1) dated 17.02.2025 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal centre(NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2015-16. The reference to the word “Act” in this order hereinafter shall mean the Income Tax Act, 1961 as amended from time to time. 2.0 At the outset the Ld. Counsel for the assesse informed that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has passed an ex-parte order thereby confirming the assessment order u/s 147 r.w. 144 dated 16.03.2023 and that the appeal was dismissed for being filed late without any justified grounds. It was pleaded that the assesse had committed delay of about 9 months and for which it had justified grounds. It was stated that the delay had occurred on account of miscommunication between the appellant under previous auditor. It was argued that even the assessment order was passed by the Ld.AO as ex-parte as the assessee could not comply with the statutory notices within the given time. The Ld. Counsel submitted the matter may be restored to Ld. AO for readjudication on its merits and that it shall make full compliance to the notices of Ld. AO. Personal assurance was given to this effect. The Ld.Counsel also submitted that the addition of Rs.97,94,623/- has been made by the Ld.AO on the premise of non-availability of evidences towards source of purchase of the property. It was stated that the property was sourced through Housing Loan from Punjab National Bank and which admittedly could not be produced before the Ld.AO. In support of its contentions, the Ld. Counsel filed a detailed paperbook. 3.0 Per contra, the Ld.DR relied upon the order of lower authorities. 4.0 We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material available on records. It is trite law that no litigant benefits by non- prosecution of its case. We find sufficient force in the pleadings of the assesse as to why it could not file its appeal in time before the Ld.CIT(A). Page - 2 - of 4 We have also noted that apart from merely harping on the issue of delayed filing by the assesse the Ld. CIT(A) has not touched upon merits of the case. We have noted from the letter of the PNB Housing finance at page 111 of the paper book that a loan of Rs.78,35,000/- was sanctioned to the assessee on 28.04.2014 for repayment in 240 months. 5.0 Be that as it may be, we are of the view that the matter of sources of property have not been objectively and comprehensively analyzed by the lower authorities. We are of the view that ends of justice would be met if the assessee is given one last opportunity to present its case and filed supporting evidences before the Ld.AO. The decision to remit it back to the Ld. AO is taken in view of the fact that an Assessing Officer is the fulcrum of assessment proceedings. He possess the first right and responsibilities to examine facts of a case before arriving at his decision qua determination of taxable income in a particular case. Without prejudice it has also been noted that in this case the Ld. AO did not have adequate opportunities to examine the varied facts seminal therein. We have noted with respectful deference the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of TIN box 249 ITR 216 on the subject matter. Accordingly, the issue of addition qua sources of property purchased which have been contested by the assessee through its grounds of appeal supra stands remitted back to the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication de novo by passing a speaking order and in accordance with law. To the Page - 3 - of 4 extent the order of lower authorities on this issue stands set aside. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities of being heard to the assesse and it shall be bounden upon the assesse to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. AO. Any non-compliance on the part of the assesse can be adversely viewed. The assessee is at its liberty to produce the evidences placed before us for consideration of the Ld.AO. The assessee is at liberty to produce all the evidences filed through its paper book before us including any other evidences deemed relevant in support of its claims before the Ld. AO during the readjudication proceedings. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are therefore allowed for statistical purposes. 6.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 19th , June-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनु कुमार धिरर) (अधमताभ शुक्ला) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (AMITABH SHUKLA) न्याधयक सदस्य / Judicial Member लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 19th , June-2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF

Page - 4 - of 4