HOTEL GANESH PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-2(3), CHENNAI

Years: 2018-19 Hotel Ganesh Private Limited Income Tax Officer No.-F-58, 4th street, Corporate Ward-2(3) Anna Nagar, Chennai Chennai-600 040. [PAN: AAACH0880Q] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Ms. A.Nikitha, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Mr.R.Raghupathy, Addl. CIT सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18.02.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 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/250/2024-25/1067982720(1) dated 26.08.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2018-19. Through the aforesaid appeal the assessee has challenged order u/s 250 dated 26.08.2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi.

Page - 1 - of 4 2.0 It has been noted that there is a delay of 39 days in the case, in filing of this appeal before the tribunal. In its affidavit the assesse has pleaded that the assesse is Director of a company into Hotel business. It was submitted that the delay before tribunal had occurred because of ill- health and hospitalization of assessee’s father who was also Managing Director. It was submitted that the same precluded from timely compliance to tax deadlines. All these activities contributed to the delay which was neither willful nor wanton. The assesse submitted that there will not be case of any non-compliance now. We have considered the justification put forth by the assesse and we are satisfied with their adequacy. We are also conscious of the fact that no litigant gains by intentionally delaying its own matters. The Ld. DR did not pose any serious objections to the delay. Accordingly, we hereby condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate this appeal.

3.0 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 143(3) dated 11.03.2021 and that the appeal was dismissed for non-compliance to statutory notices. It was pleaded that the non-compliance of the assesse was attributable to adverse health of his father and was not intentional. The Ld. Counsel for Page - 2 - of 4 the assesse pleaded for setting aside the case to Ld.CIT(A) and assured that full compliance would now be made to the statutory notices of the Ld. CIT(A).

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 prosecute its appeal before Ld CIT(A). We have also noted that apart from merely harping on the issue of non- compliance by the assesse the Ld. CIT(A) has not touched upon merits of the case.

5.0 We are therefore of the view that ends of justice would be met if the case is set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for readjudication after giving opportunities of being heard to the assesse and to pass a speaking order. The assesse shall be bound to comply to all the notices and details called by the Ld. CIT(A). Any non-compliance from the assesse side shall be adversely viewed. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority and direct him to readjudicate the matter de novo. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal raised by the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes.

Page - 3 - of 4 6.0 In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 21st , February-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- ( एबी टी. वकी) (अयिताभ शुक्ला) (ABY T VARKEY) (AMITABH SHUKLA) न्यानयक सदस्य / Judicial Member लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, नदिांक/Dated: 21st , February-2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/Copy to: 1. अपीलार्थी/Assessee: 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Revenue 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Chennai 4. नवभागीय प्रनतनिनर्/DR 5. गार्ा फाईल/GF

Page - 4 - of 4