ATTURAMPALAYAM VENKATACHALAM KRISHNAKUMAR,NAMAKKAL V. ITO, WARD-1, TIRUCHENGODE

ITA 1890/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Atturampalayam Venkatachalam Krishna Kumar, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which dismissed his appeal ex parte. The dismissal was due to the appellant's non-response to notices during the appellate proceedings. The appellant argued that the delay in responding and filing the appeal was unintentional and due to circumstances beyond his control, including the need for professional guidance and the geographical distance to his consultant. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's request for another opportunity to present his case and thus restored the matter to the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 773536 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘ए’ \u0010ा यपीठ चे\u0015ई म\u0018। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1890/Chny/2025 (Assessment Year 2017-18) Atturampalayam Venkatachalam Krishna Kumar, D. No. 8/29, Athurampalayam, Morur Post, Tiruchengode, Namakkal, Tamilnadu-637211. PAN No. AWIPK 1950 F Vs. I.T.O., Ward-1, Tiruchengode. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee represented by Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, C.A. Department represented by Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure, JCIT. Date of hearing 16/09/2025 Date of pronouncement 26/09/2025 PER: RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 26/02/2025 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 as per ground of appeal on record. 2. At the outset of hearing, we found from perusal of record that there is delay of 63 days in filing this appeal before this Tribunal for which, the assessee has filed an application for condonation in the form of affidavit mentioning the fact that the assessee received notices under Section 270A, 271A, 271B and 271AAC(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) on 06/06/2025 from the Verification Unit, Income Tax Department. The notices were received through Income Tax Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA1890/Chny/2025 Atturampalayam Venkatachalam Krishna Kumar Vs ITO Inspector, Tiruchengode ward in the second week of June, 2025. After receiving the notices, the assessee consulted one CA Shri Sathyan Ganesan for professional guidance. He advised me to consult CA T.S. Lakshmivenkataram Salem for professional guidance. The assessee stated that since the distance between the assessee and the engaged CA is around 65 KM so the assessee could not contact the concerned CA immediately. In the last week of June, 2025, the assessee consulted the CA and he informed me that the appellate order was already passed by the ld. CIT(A) on 26/02/2025 by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. Thereafter, the concerned CA prepared the appeal file and immediately the present appeal on 02/07/2025 before this Tribunal. The assessee stated that the delay is not intentional and deliberate, the same was due to situation beyond his control. He has good case on merit and is likely to succeed, if one more opportunity is provided to the assessee. 3. On merit of the case, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer has passed assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act on 26/12/2019 by making various additions. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the appeal was dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) by passing ex parte order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee has good case on merit and prayed that one more opportunity may be provided and the matter may be restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for deciding the issue on merit. 4. On the other hand, the ld. Sr.DR for the revenue on the application of condonation of delay, submitted that the Bench may take appropriate view as per Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA1890/Chny/2025 Atturampalayam Venkatachalam Krishna Kumar Vs ITO law. On merit, the ld. Sr.DR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has given ample opportunities of hearing to the assessee by issuing various notices but the assessee has not responded to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). The assessee was not serious in pursing his appeal before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, the assessee does not deserve any leniency at this stage. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. On the issue of condonation of delay, we find that the delay was not deliberate and occurred due to lack of proper guidance as mentioned in the affidavit. Thus, we condone the delay of 63 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal and admit the same for hearing. 6. On merit, we find that the Assessing Officer has passed assessment order under Section 143(3) on 26/12/2019 by making various additions. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing ex parte order on the ground that no response has been made by the appellant to the notices of hearing and also no application for adjournment nor any written submissions have been submitted till the date of disposal of the appeal. No submission or evidence in respect of the additions made has been adduced by the assessee during the appellate proceedings. Before us, the ld. AR submitted that one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee to represent his case on merit before the ld. CIT(A). Thus, considering the principles of natural justice, the matter is restored back to the file of Assessing Officer for deciding the issue afresh by providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Assessing Officer and file all the relevant documents Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA1890/Chny/2025 Atturampalayam Venkatachalam Krishna Kumar Vs ITO and evidences as required by the Assessing Officer. In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only. 7. In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26/09/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SS VISWANETHRA RAVI) (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Chennai, Dated: 26/09/2025 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. CIT 4. DR 5. Guard File By order Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Chennai Printed from counselvise.com "