CHANDRAN SARAVANAN,SALEM V. ITO, WARD-1(8), SALEM

ITA 661/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Chandran Saravanan against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, which dismissed his appeal for non-compliance due to failure to respond to six notices. The assessee, suffering from liver cirrhosis, was unable to comply with the procedural requirements due to health issues and lack of familiarity with the electronic filing system. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the merits, as the appellate authority is required to decide on the merits even in the absence of the assessee. The Tribunal noted the procedural lapses and health issues cited by the assessee and decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 398182 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: Southern Steel Industries vs. AAC (CT) [1996] 101 STC 273 (Mad)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRYATI SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: N. ARJUN RAJ
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘ए’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ क े, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 661/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year:2017-18 Shri Chandran Saravanan, 3/20, Kuthiraikaran Pudur, Banapuram Post, Mecheri (VIA), Salem – 636 451. PAN: EEOPS 5129Q Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(8), Salem. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri N. Arjun Raj, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Pryati Sharma, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 03.06.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 03.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 26.07.2023, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18. - 2 - ITA No.661/CHNY/2025 2. There is a delay of 520 days in filing the appeal. The assessee has filed condonation petition along with affidavit stating therein the reasons for belated filing of this appeal. The reasons stated in the affidavit for belated filing is, on account of poor health of the assessee who was suffering from liver cirrhosis. Due to his health condition, the assessee missed the First Appellate proceedings and the First Appellate order. The assessee has also filed Medical Certificate issued by the Doctor. Moreover, it was stated that the assessee was not very conversant with the electronic regime of the income tax proceedings resulting in delay. Later, on verifying the e- portal, the Chartered Accountant noticed the order passed by the First Appellate Authority and immediately steps were taken by the assessee to file the appeal before the Tribunal, which has resulted in delay of 520 days. On perusal of the aforesaid reason stated, we are of the view that the assessee cannot be faulted for non-filing the appeal on time. There is sufficient reason and no latches can be attributed to the assessee for belated filing of this appeal. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 3. At the very outset, we notice that the CIT(A)’s order is ex- parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to the six notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. We also - 3 - ITA No.661/CHNY/2025 note that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in- limine without adjudicating the issues on merits. 4. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee could not respond to the notices or appear before CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings due to his health condition. The Ld.AR further submitted that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non-compliance and not on merits. It was prayed, in the interest of justice and equity, assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present his case before the CIT(A). 5. The Ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the CIT(A) and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. However, she could not controvert the fact that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non-compliance. 6. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. We noted that the CIT(A)-NFAC has simpliciter dismissed the appeal for non-compliance and not adjudicated or decided merits of the case. We find that appellate authority has no jurisdiction to dismiss the appeal for default of non-compliance without going into merits. The CIT(A) is bound to decide the appeal on merits even in - 4 - ITA No.661/CHNY/2025 the absence of assessee. This view of ours is supported by the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Southern Steel Industries vs. AAC (CT), reported in [1996] 101 STC 273 (Mad). In term of the above, the order of CIT(A)-NFAC is set aside and matter remanded back to his file for fresh adjudication on merits after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard 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 3rd June, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (एस.आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चेÛनई/Chennai, Ǒदनांक/Dated, the 3rd 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. "