SUBBUNADAR CHANDRA SEKAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, CORP WARD 6(3), CHENNAI

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- 24/1059671029 (1) dated 12.01.2024. The assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward 6(3), Chennai for the assessment year 2017-18 u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) vide order dated 26.12.2019.

At the outset, the ld.counsel for the assessee Ms.Muthu Abirami, Advocate drew our attention to the following Ground Nos.2 to 5 and stated that the CIT(A)-NFAC disposed off the appeal ex- parte and without providing opportunity of being heard in violation of principles of natural justice:-

The ld.counsel for the assessee took us through the order of CIT(A)-NFAC, para 5 at page 19 and stated that the CIT(A)-NFAC has noted four opportunities and at the first instance, the assessee sought adjournment and therafter also assessee requested for granting of time to file submissions in the e-proceedings tab when the appeal was posted for hearing. But the CIT(A)-NFAC noted that on the date of fixation i.e., 25.08.2023, 20.10.2023 and 15.12.2023, none complied. The ld.counsel also drew our attention to the grounds adjudicated by CIT(A)-NFAC in regard to addition of Rs.82,89,500/- added as unexplained investment u/s.69 of the Act, disallowance of Rs.2,75,860/- u/s.14A of the Act and addition of agricultural income of Rs.6,00,000/- and pointed out the findings of - 3 - CIT(A)-NFAC which is just a cryptic finding and there is no adjudication actually on merits despite the fact that the order is of 65 pages.

When this was pointed out to ld. Senior DR, he stated that despite fixation of this appeal for four times, assessee has not complied and this is a fact recorded by CIT(A)-NFAC in his order at page 19 as pointed out by ld.counsel. Except this, he could not controvert the fact that the order of CIT(A)-NFAC is ex-parte and moreover the finding of CIT(A)-NFAC on each of the ground is cryptic.

After hearing rival submissions and going through the facts of the case, without elaborating anything on merits, we feel that the CIT(A)-NFAC disposed off the appeal ex-parte and without providing sufficient opportunity of hearing also. It is also not clear that the assessee has complied with the notices as claimed by assessee. Hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of CIT(A)- NFAC and remand the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. This setting aside is subject to a cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to be paid to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras by the assessee within a - 4 - month’s time from the date of receipt of this order. The assessee will pay this cost and produce the receipt before the CIT(A). In term of the above, the order of the CIT(A)-NFAC is set aside and matter remanded back to his file for fresh adjudication after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

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