What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A). The appeal was set aside for denovo adjudication, with the CIT(A) directed to provide a proper hearing.

The assessee's appeal arose from an order of the CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to non-response to notices. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer for the assessment year 2017-18.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted a further opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) after an ex-parte dismissal.

Vijayakumar, Palur vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2025

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI

Hearing: 18.12.2024Pronounced: 09.01.2025

[PAN: APLPV 9207J] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. Abhishek Murali, C.A., ��यथ� क� ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl. CIT. सुनवाई क� तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 18.12.2024 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 09.01.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1059021319 (1) dated 22.12.2023. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward 22(5) Tambaram for the assessment year 2017-18 u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), vide order dated 22.12.2023

VIJAYAKUMAR,PALUR vs. ITO, NCW-22(4),, TAMBARAM

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments