"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.: 981/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year:2017-18 P.R.V. Constructions Pvt. Ltd., 6/73, North Silver Street, St. Thomas Mount H.O., St. Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600 016. PAN: AADCP 8905H Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle-5(2), Chennai. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri B. Sekar, CA ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Kumar Chandan, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18.06.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 23.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 27.02.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2017-18. - 2 - ITA No.981/CHNY/2025 2. At the very outset, we notice that the order of First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to four notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. 3. The Ld.AR submitted that the hearing notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority (FAA) were sent to the email id which was given in the income-tax return filed by the assessee and not to the email id given in Form 35, which was not accessible by the assessee. Therefore, the assessee could not appear 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 its case. 4. The ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the office 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 proceedings before FAA was ex-parte, since the assessee did not respond to various notices issued. We strongly deprecate the - 3 - ITA No.981/CHNY/2025 nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices issued from the offices 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. 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 23rd 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 23rd June, 2025 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. "