THIRUMAL MURUGAM,CHENNAI vs. NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 17(1), BSNL BUILDING

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3159/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 January 2026AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K (Vice President), MS PADMAVATHY S (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the ex-parte order was passed because the assessee failed to respond to notices from the FAA. Despite deprecating the assessee's attitude, the Tribunal, in the interest of justice, decided to restore the matter to the FAA for a fresh adjudication, offering a last opportunity for proper representation.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The First Appellate Authority (FAA) had passed an ex-parte order due to the assessee's non-compliance with three notices. The assessee's representative submitted that they missed the hearing notices, preventing proper representation.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the FAA should be set aside due to the assessee's failure to respond to notices, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND MS PADMAVATHY S

Hearing: 20.01.2026Pronounced: 20.01.2026

आदेश/ O R D E R

PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 15.09.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2020-21.

2. At the very outset, we notice that the order passed by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to three notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority.

4.

The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee has missed to take note of the hearing notices issued from the office of the FAA. Therefore, the assessee could not represent his case before the FAA during the appellate proceedings. Hence, it was prayed in the interest of justice and equity, the issue may be restored to the files of the FAA as a last opportunity for proper representation of his case.

5.

The Ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the FAA and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was prayed the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.

6.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceeding before the FAA was ex-parte, since the assessee did not respond to the notices issued. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has missed to take note of the hearing notices. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not :- 3 -:

FAA. However, 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 FAA as a last opportunity. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the files of the FAA for fresh adjudication. The FAA 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.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20th January, 2026 at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →