APPASAMY SAROJA,DHARMAPURI V. ITO, WARD-1, DHARMAPURI

ITA 3204/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Appasamy Saroja, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Kolkata, concerning the assessment year 2016-17. The appeal was initially delayed by 77 days due to the assessee's unawareness of the appellate order and hearing notices, as she had closed her business in 2019 due to a financial crisis. Upon learning about the outstanding demand, she filed the appeal with the assistance of her Chartered Accountant and a new counsel. The ITAT found sufficient reason for the delay and condoned it. The main legal contention arose from the FAA's ex-parte decision, which the assessee contested due to her lack of response to the notices. The ITAT, considering the principles of natural justice, decided to restore the matter to the FAA for a fresh hearing, emphasizing the need for fair play and justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 668833 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C.P. SOLOMON
• Assessee Lawyers: G. AKASH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ (एस एम सी), ᭠यायपीठ,चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ (SMC) BENCH, CHENNAI ᮰ी जॉजᭅ जॉजᭅ, उपा᭟यᭃ के समᭃ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 3204/CHNY/2024 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Smt. Appasamy Saroja, 1/7, Velampatti Village, O.G. Halli Post, Pennagaram Tk., Dharmapurai – 636 809. PAN: AYZPS 9604D Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Dharmapuri. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri G. Akash, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25.06.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R This appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Kolkata dated 30.07.2024 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2016-17. ITA No.3204/Chny/2024 :- 2 -: 2. There is a delay of 77 days in filing the appeal. The assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay along with affidavit stating therein the reasons for belated filing of this appeal. The reasons stated in the affidavit for belated filing is that the assessee had closed her business during 2019 due to financial crisis and hence, she was unaware of the hearing notices and the appellate order. The assessee came to know about the order passed only when she received a phone call regarding the outstanding demand. Immediately, the assessee approached her Chartered Accountant, who advised her to approach the present counsel for filing the appeal and appeal has been filed with a delay of 77 days. On perusal of the same, I find there is sufficient reason for delay in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. Hence, I condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 3. At the very outset, I notice that the order of First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to five notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. ITA No.3204/Chny/2024 :- 3 -: 4. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee was unaware of the hearing notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority (FAA), since the assessee had closed her business due to financial crises. 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 its case. 5. The Ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the office 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. I have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceedings before FAA was ex-parte, since the assessee did not respond to various notices issued. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices issued from the offices of the 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. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the files of the FAA for fresh adjudication. The FAA shall afford reasonable opportunity of ITA No.3204/Chny/2024 :- 4 -: 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 25th June, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- ((जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 25th June, 2025 RSR आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Salem 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF. "