What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, citing principles of natural justice. The assessee was granted another opportunity for a de novo assessment at a cost of Rs. 2,000.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2018-19 was filed with a delay of 145 days. The delay was attributed to notices being sent to an inaccessible email address. The assessee sought an opportunity to present its case.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity for assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144, Section 143(3A), Section 143(3B)

Rangasamy Balasubramaniam… vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM & HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ "ायपीठ चे"ई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ/वाल ,लेखा सद4 एवं माननीय +ी मनु कुमार िग7र, "ाियक सद4 के सम8। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM आयकरअपील सं./ (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Rangasamy Balasubramaniam ITO 32/NA, KonarThottam, Non Corporate Ward 4(3), बनाम/ OppKurushi Housing, Coimbatore. Vs. Unit Phase II, Pillayarpuram, Sidco Coimbatore – 641 021. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. BLLPB-3130-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Girish Kumar (Advocate)-Ld.AR " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri Nilay Baran Som (CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 30-04-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 06-05-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 08-08- 2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] on best judgment basis u/s 144 r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act on 10-04-2021. The registry has noted delay of 145 in appeal, the condonation of which has been sought by Ld. AR on the strength of condonation petition which is supported by an affidavit of the assessee. It has been submitted that notices were sent on an email id which was not accessible to the assessee. Though Ld. Sr. DR opposed condonation of delay, however, accepting the plea of Ld. AR, we condone the delay.

The Ld. AR has pleaded for another opportunity of hearing which has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. 3. Though the assessee has remained negligent, however, keeping in mind the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. The same would come at a cost of Rs.2,000/- 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 Ld. AO who shall proceed for de novo assessment after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case forthwith failing which Ld. AO shall be at liberty to proceed with assessment on the basis of material on record. 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 6th May, 2024 (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) "ाियक सद4 / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद4 / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे4ई Chennai; िदनांक Dated : 06-05-2024 DS आदेशकीNितिलिपअ/ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant 2. " थ"/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु=/CIT 4. िवभागीय"ितिनिध/DR 5. गाडBफाईल/GF

RANGASAMY BALASUBRAMANIAM,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, NCW 4(3), COIMBATORE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments