MARAPPA GOUNDER PERIASAMY,CHENNAI V. ITO, NCC-19(1), CHENNAI

ITA 2221/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Marappagounder Periasamy, the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(A) which was a verbatim copy of an unrelated appellate order for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The appellant argued that the CIT(A) had erroneously dismissed his appeal by reproducing the previous year's order, including the statement of facts and grounds of appeal, which were not relevant to the year under consideration, 2013-14. Both the appellant's and respondent's representatives agreed that the CIT(A) had not properly adjudicated the appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case for a fresh decision based on the correct facts and legal grounds pertinent to the Assessment Year 2013-14.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 781453 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: S. SUNDAR RAMAN; C.A
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Application of stay

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ \u0011ा यपीठ, चे\u0016ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0019ी मनु क ुमा र िग र, \u0011ा ियक सद! एवं \u0019ी जगदीश, लेखा सद! क े सम( BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2221/Chny/2025 & S.A No.91/Chny/2025 (Arises in ITA No.2221/Chny/2025) िनधा Aरण वषA /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Marappagounder Periasamy, 13, Defence Officer’s Colony, 2nd Avenue, Guindy, Chennai – 600 032. PAN: AAGPP 9234K Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Circle-19(1), Chennai. (अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant) (\b यथ\u0007/Respondent) अपीलाथL की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri S. Sundar Raman, C.A NOथL की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 26.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 29.09.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid stay application along with the appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 18.03.2025. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2221/Chny/2025 & S.A No.91/Chny/2025 Marappagounder Periasamy :- 2 -: 2. When the stay application was taken up for hearing, the Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal by merely reproducing his order for A.Y. 2014-15, rendering the order wholly erroneous. It was further pointed out that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is a verbatim copy-and- paste of the appellate order for A.Y. 2014-15, including even the statement of facts and grounds of appeal, which actually pertain to A.Y. 2014-15 and not the year under consideration, therefore the matter has to go back to Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal. On stay application, the Ld. AR has submitted that the assessee has already paid more than 20% of tax demanded. 3. The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) fairly agreed with the submissions of the Ld. A.R. that the Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the appeal and simply copied and pasted order of A.Y 2014-15. 4. We have heard both parties. On a perusal of the impugned order, we find that the learned CIT(A) has passed the appellate order mindlessly, by copying and pasting the appellate order of A.Y. 2014- 15, without considering the statement of facts and grounds of appeal of relevant A.Y 2013-14. In such circumstances, no action can be Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2221/Chny/2025 & S.A No.91/Chny/2025 Marappagounder Periasamy :- 3 -: taken based on such order. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file with a direction to pass a fresh order for A.Y. 2013-14, after considering the correct statement of facts and grounds of appeal, and after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 5. Since we have already set aside the main appeal, the stay application filed by the assessee has become infructuous and is dismissed accordingly. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the stay application is dismissed as infructuous. Order pronounced on 29th day of September, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (मनु क ुमार िग र) (Manu Kumar Giri) \u0011ाियक सद! / Judicial Member (जगदीश) (Jagadish) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य /Accountant Member चे\u0013नई/Chennai, \u0016दनांक/Dated: 29th September, 2025. EDN/- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2221/Chny/2025 & S.A No.91/Chny/2025 Marappagounder Periasamy :- 4 -: आदेश क\u0019 \bितिल प अ े षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u000f/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय \bितिनिध/DR 5. गाड\u0018 फाईल/GF Printed from counselvise.com "