MURUGESAN VENKATACHALAM,KAVUNDAMPALAYAM V. ITO, NCW03(1), COIMBATORE

ITA 4029/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Murugesan Venkatachalam 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 directed against the best judgment assessment completed under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Act. The First Appellate Authority confirmed the additions made by the AO due to the absence of documentary evidence from the assessee. The assessee's representative argued that the necessary documents could not be obtained during the assessment proceedings, and requested a restoration of the issue to the AO for proper representation. The Departmental Representative opposed this, citing that adequate opportunities were provided and there was no violation of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837991 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V. SREENIVASAN
• Assessee Lawyers: T.S. LAKSHMI VENKATRAMAN
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘डी’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ क े, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी इंटूरȣ रामा राव, लेखा सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 4029/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Shri Murugesan Venkatachalam, 14/10, Brindavan Nagar, P4T Colony, Kavundamapalayam – 641030. PAN: AGZPV 7556M Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 3(1), Coimbatore. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, CA (Through Virtual Mode) ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 17.02.2026 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 18.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 08.12.2025 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.4029/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: 2. At the very outset, we notice that the assessment has been completed on best judgment basis u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act on 27.01.2025. Further the First Appellate Authority (FAA) has also confirmed the additions made by the AO stating that the assessee has not furnished any documentary evidence in support of his contentions. 3. The ld.AR submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of providing construction services for construction of residential property. The Ld.AR submitted that the FAA has confirmed the additions made by the AO since assessee has not filed documentary evidence, which the assessee was not able to obtain during the course of assessment proceedings. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessment is also best judgment assessment and hence, it was prayed in the interest of justice and equity, the issue may be restored to the files of the AO as a last opportunity for proper representation of his case. 4. The ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the AO and the FAA and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was prayed the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4029/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: 5. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. Before FAA, assessee has filed written submissions but has not produced any documentary evidences. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee could not obtain the relevant documents during the course of assessment proceedings. Even the proceedings before the AO 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 AO. Therefore, 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 AO with a condition assessee pays a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to be paid to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The amount of Rs.10,000/- shall be paid within a month’s time from the date of receipt of this order and assessee shall produce the receipt for the said payment before the AO. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the files of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO 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. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4029/Chny/2025 :- 4 -: 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 18th February, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (इंटूरȣ रामा राव) (INTURI RAMA RAO) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 18th February, 2026 RSR 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 "