KALAISELVI,COIMBATORE V. ITO, NCW-4(1), COIMBATORE

ITA 3217/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Smt. Kalaiselvi against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which was passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2020-21. The appeal was necessitated due to the assessee's claim that she did not receive notices from the FAA due to technical issues and changes in email usage, leading to an ex-parte decision by the FAA. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Chennai, after hearing the submissions, decided to remit the case back to the FAA, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 831804 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 12-11-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.KAVITHA
• Assessee Lawyers: K. MUTHUKUMAR
• Keywords: 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 सुĮी पɮमावती एस, लेखा सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENTAND MS PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 3217/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Smt. Kalaiselvi, No.6a, Sundaram Park Town, Chinnavedampatti, Coimbatore – 641 049 PAN: GRYPK 4931D Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 4(1), Coimbatore (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri K. Muthu Kumar, CA ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21.01.2026 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 15.10.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2020-21. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3217/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: 2. At the very outset, we notice that the order passed by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to the notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. 3. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee did not receive the hearing notices issued from the office of the FAA due to technical issues, change of e-mail usage and non-receipt of communication alerts on the faceless portal. Therefore, the assessee could not respond to the notices and was unaware of the hearing schedule and hence, could not appear before the FAA during the appellate proceedings. 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 the case. 4. The Ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices 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. 5. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceeding before the FAA was ex-parte, since the assessee did not respond to the notices issued. The Ld.AR submitted Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3217/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: that the due to technical issue, change of e-mail usage and non- receipt of communication alerts on the faceless portal, the assessee was unaware of the hearing notices issued from the office of the FAA. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices issued from the office 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 as a last opportunity. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the files of the FAA for fresh adjudication. The FAA shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd January, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (पɮमावती एस) (PADMAVATHY S) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 22nd January, 2026 RSR Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3217/Chny/2025 :- 4 -: आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Coimbatore 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "