RAJENDRAN PALANIVELU,PUDUKKOTTAI vs. ITO WARD 1, PUDUKKOTTAI, PUDUKKOTTAI

ITA 3940/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 March 2026AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) is duty-bound to dispose of the appeal on merits, even if it is an ex-parte appeal. Dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without considering the merits violates the principles of natural justice and settled legal position.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] which confirmed a disallowance of Rs. 5,05,605/- for alleged failure to furnish documentary evidence. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal in limine for non-prosecution without examining the merits of the additions made by the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on the merits of the case and whether the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 143(3A),Section 143(3B),Section 37(1),Section 145,Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 234C,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH :: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI

Hearing: 10.03.2026

PER INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the Order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax [National Faceless Appeal Centre], Delhi (hereinafter called as ‘NFAC’) passed under section 250 of the Act, dated 10.09.2025 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. For that, the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 37(1)

All 6,995 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →