SYDHA MOHAMMED MOHAMMED YASIN,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO WARD 1, TIRUCHENGODE
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, citing the principle of natural justice. The assessee was granted another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) upon payment of Rs. 10,000/-.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal arose from an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's failure to appear before lower authorities. There was a significant delay in filing the current appeal.
What were the issues?
Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal and grant a fresh opportunity for hearing before the lower appellate authority.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 22-07-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 08-08-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of an ex-parte order passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] on 31-10-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] on best judgment basis u/s 144 of the Act on 25- 09-2019. In the assessment order, Ld. AO made addition of cash deposits. It could be seen that the assessee has failed to appear before any of lower authorities. The registry has noted a delay of 124 days in the appeal. During hearing before us, Ld. AR has pleaded for admission of appeal and sought another opportunity of hearing before lower authorities which has vehemently been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR.
Though the assessee has remained negligent, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we condone the delay and deem it fit to grant another opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. The same would come at a cost of Rs.10,000/- which shall be deposited by the assessee within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order to ‘Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority’ at Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The proof of the same shall be furnished by the assessee to learned CIT(A) who shall proceed for de novo adjudication after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with disposal of appeal on merits on the basis of material on record. 3. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 8th August, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा34 / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद6 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे8ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated :08-08-2024 DS आदेशकीIितिलिपअ%ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. � थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु@/CIT Salem. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडEफाईल/GF
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026