SRIRANGAGOUNDER PARAMASIVAM,TIRUPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), TIRUPPUR

The main grievance of the assessee is against the action of the Ld.CIT(A) passing ex parte order qua assessee. According to the Ld.AR, the Ld.CIT(A) only granted one opportunity to the assessee by issuing notice dated 30.01.2021 and thereafter, has passed the impugned order on 14.10.2024, meaning after issuing notice during the Covid-19 pandemic period, the Ld.CIT(A) has passed the impugned order dismissing the appeal on the ground that the assessee didn’t respond to his notice dated 30.01.2021. The said averments of the Ld.AR couldn’t be controverted by the Ld.DR for the Revenue. Having gone through the impugned order, we find that the Ld.CIT(A) has issued notice once on 30.01.2021 directing the assessee to file written submissions in support of grounds of appeal on or before 15.02.2021 and finding that the assessee didn’t file any response, he has dismissed it on 14.10.2024 [refer Para No.6 of Ld.CIT(A)] 3. In the light of the aforesaid fact, we find that there is a gross violation of natural justice and therefore, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to his file, with a direction to decide the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee as mandated by sub- sec.6 of section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act‘). The Ld.AR has undertaken to appear and file the written submissions and other relevant documents in support of grounds of Mr. Srirangagounder Paramasivam :: 3 ::

अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. थ /Respondent 3. आयकरआयु/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीयितिनिध/DR 5. गाड फाईल/GF