Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal is against the order of CIT(A) confirming additions made by the AO on a best judgment basis. The assessee failed to provide documentary evidence during assessment proceedings, leading to ex-parte proceedings and confirmation of additions by both the AO and FAA.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to provide documentary evidence and their nonchalant attitude towards notices. However, to ensure justice and fair play, the matter was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity for adjudication despite failing to provide documentary evidence and respond to notices.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO
आदेश/ O R D E R
PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 08.12.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2020-21.
At the very outset, we notice that the assessment has been 2. completed on best judgment basis u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act on 27.01.2025. Further the First Appellate Authority (FAA) has also confirmed the additions made by the AO stating that the assessee has not furnished any documentary evidence in support of his contentions.
The ld.AR submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of providing construction services for construction of residential property. The Ld.AR submitted that the FAA has confirmed the additions made by the AO since assessee has not filed documentary evidence, which the assessee was not able to obtain during the course of assessment proceedings. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessment is also best judgment assessment and hence, it was prayed in the interest of justice and equity, the issue may be restored to the files of the AO as a last opportunity for proper representation of his case.
The ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the AO and the FAA and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was prayed the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. Before FAA, assessee has filed written submissions but has not produced any documentary evidences. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee could not obtain the relevant documents during the course of assessment proceedings. Even the proceedings before the AO was ex-parte, since the assessee did not respond to various notices issued. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices issued from the offices of the AO. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that the matter ought to be restored to the files of the AO with a condition assessee pays a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to be paid to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The amount of Rs.10,000/- shall be paid within a month’s time from the date of receipt of this order and assessee shall produce the receipt for the said payment before the AO. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the files of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18th February, 2026 at Chennai.