MUTHUKRISHNAN,CUDDALORE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CUDDALORE

ITA 2615/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Muthukrishnan 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 2011-12. The primary contention was that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) had confirmed the additions made by the AO without considering additional evidences submitted during the appellate proceedings, as the assessee had not formally requested their admission under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules. The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to respond to various notices and the ex-parte nature of the proceedings before the AO, leading to a best judgment assessment under sections 144 and 147 of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 827124 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 22-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: R. HEMALATHA
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘बी’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ 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.: 2615/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Muthukrishnan, 74, Pillayar Koil Street, SIPCOT, Cuddalore – 607 005. PAN: AVMPM 4855E Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Cuddalore (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Ms. R. Hemalatha, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl.CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 08.01.2026 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 08.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 15.07.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2011-12. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2615/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: 2. At the very outset, we notice that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) had confirmed the additions made by the AO without taking into record the additional evidences filed during the appellate proceedings. Moreover, we also note that the assessment has been completed on best judgment assessment u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 3. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that FAA had dismissed the appeal without taking into record the details and documents filed during the appellate proceedings by observing that the assessee has not filed any request to accept the additional evidences under 46A of the Income Tax Rules. The Ld.AR submitted that since the assessee had failed to file petition for admission of additional evidences, the FAA had not considered the details and documents furnished before him. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessment has also been completed on best judgment basis u/s.144 of the Act. Therefore, 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 supported the order of the AO and the FAA. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2615/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: 5. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. Before the FAA, the assessee has produced certain details and documents but failed to file the petition for admission of additional evidences under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules. Therefore, the FAA had dismissed the appeal of the assessee without considering the additional evidences filed before him. Moreover, 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. 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 AO with a condition assessee pays a cost of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) to be paid to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The amount of Rs.25,000/- 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.2615/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 8th 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 8th January, 2026 RSR आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Chennai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "