DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE-1, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE vs. SHRI. SOMANUR RAMASWAMY BHOOPATHY, COIMBATORE
In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed
ITA 4133/CHNY/2025[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Mar 2026
Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.:4133/Chny/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Shri. Somanur Ramaswamy Corporate Circle – 1, Vs. Bhoopathy, Coimbatore. 21, New Lorry Stand, South Ukkadam, Coimbatore – 641 001. [Pan:Adopb-4129-L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. Aroon Praasad, Addl. Cit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Mr. Gokul Raj, Advocate सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2026 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.03.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per S. R. Raghunatha, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Dated 28.10.2025, Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi (In Short “Ld.Cit(A)”) For The Assessment Year (A.Y) 2016-17 Against The Order U/S.147 R.W.S.144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Passed By The Ao, Nfac, Delhi Dated 13.03.2024. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual Engaged In The Business Of Hiring Passenger Vehicles. The Assessee Had Not Filed His Return Of Income For A.Y.2016-17 As Per Section 139 Of The Act. Based On The Information
For Appellant: Mr. Aroon Praasad, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Mr. Gokul Raj, Advocate
Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 251(1)(a)
best judgement assessment order and hence the ld.CIT(A) has set aside the assessment order and in accordance with proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act remitted the file to the Assessing Officer to frame the assessment afresh.
Aggrieved by the impugned orders of the Ld.CIT ... assessee, has set aside the order and remitted to the Assessing Officer for framing the assessment denovo in accordance with proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A) and hence we dismiss the appeal