RAJASEKAR KOTHANDAPANI,CHENNAI vs. ITO, BUSINESS WARD 4, CHENNAI, CHENNAI

This appeal preferred by the assessee trust against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax,Addl/JCIT(A)-10, Delhi, dated 20.09.2024 for assessment year (in short “AY") 2007-08.

At the outset the Ld.AR of the assessee pointed out that the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) is an ex-parte order. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessment order in this case was passed on 31.12.2009 u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter in short “the Act”) and thereafter, assessee filed an appeal in January, 2010 and and thereafter, assessee filed an appeal in January, 2010 and and thereafter, assessee filed an appeal in January, 2010 and later, the appeal got migrated to NFAC by order dated 25.09.2020 and the appeal got migrated to NFAC by order dated 25.09.2020 and the appeal got migrated to NFAC by order dated 25.09.2020 and the NFAC had issued altogether five (5) notices out of the NFAC had issued altogether five (5) notices out of which three (3) which three (3)

According to the Ld.AR from the events stated above it could be According to the Ld.AR from the events stated above it could be According to the Ld.AR from the events stated above it could be seen that the assessee has promptly filed the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) seen that the assessee has promptly filed the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) seen that the assessee has promptly filed the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) on 25.01.2010 against the assessment order 31.12.2009. However, .2010 against the assessment order 31.12.2009. However, .2010 against the assessment order 31.12.2009. However, Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC issued notice Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC issued notice of hearing only after a decade of hearing only after a decade on 14.09.2020 followed by notices on 23.12.2020 and 26.02.2021 which 14.09.2020 followed by notices on 23.12.2020 and 26.02.2021 which 14.09.2020 followed by notices on 23.12.2020 and 26.02.2021 which were in the midst of the Covid were in the midst of the Covid-19 Pandemic; and thereafter the final 19 Pandemic; and thereafter the final notices were issued within a gap of 15 days otices were issued within a gap of 15 days (supra); and since the assessee was out of station, he couldn’t out of station, he couldn’t respond to the two (2) notices, to the two (2) notices, which prompted the Ld.CIT(A) to pass the ex which prompted the Ld.CIT(A) to pass the ex-parte order qua assessee. parte order qua assessee.

Per contra, the Ld.DR Per contra, the Ld.DR does not want us to give assessee one more does not want us to give assessee one more innings to the assessee

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We note We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We note We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We note that the assessment order ssment order for AY 2007-08 was passed u/s. 143(3) of the u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 31.12.2009 and pursuant to it, the and pursuant to it, the assessee filed appeal filed appeal within 25 days [i.e. on 25.01.2010 on 25.01.2010] before the Ld.CIT(A), which got migrated to the which got migrated to the NFAC after a decade and the first notice NFAC after a decade and the first notice of hearing was issued was issued to assessee on 14.09.2020 and thereafter two notices during the Covid on 14.09.2020 and thereafter two notices during the Covid on 14.09.2020 and thereafter two notices during the Covid-19 Pandemic followed by last two notices within a gap of 15 days followed by last two notices within a gap of 15 days, which time the , which time the assessee was out of station. Therefore, assessee was out of station. Therefore, assessee could not respond to could not respond to the notices which we find reasonable and therefore, which we find reasonable and therefore, for the ends of justice for the ends of justice and fair play, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order of the we are inclined to set aside the impugned order of the we are inclined to set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to his file with a direction to Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to his file with a direction to Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to his file with a direction to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the asses the appeal on merits after hearing the assessee in accordance with sub in accordance with sub- section (6) of 250 of the Act section (6) of 250 of the Act. The assessee is also directed to be diligent . The assessee is also directed to be diligent and file relevant documents/written submissions before the Ld.CIT(A) and and file relevant documents/written submissions before the Ld.CIT(A) and and file relevant documents/written submissions before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) is directed to decide the the Ld.CIT(A) is directed to decide the grounds of appeal grounds of appeal as per sub- section (6) of sec.250 of the Act. ) of sec.250 of the Act.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 26th day of February, 2025, in Chennai. Order pronounced on the , in Chennai.