RAGUPATHY MURUGAN,VILLUPURAM V. ITO, WARD-1, , VILLUPURAM

ITA 999/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Shri Ragupathy Murugan against orders from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the assessment years 2015-16 and 2018-19. The appeals were initially delayed due to the assessee's prolonged illness, supported by medical certificates. The Tribunal noted that the assessments were made on a best judgment basis under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to non-filing of returns by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the proceedings were ex-parte as the assessee did not respond to various notices. Considering the assessee's health issues and lack of literacy, the Tribunal decided to restore the matter to the AO for a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 668761 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KUMAR CHANDAN
• Assessee Lawyers: NIDHI JAIN
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" 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 Nos.: 999 & 1000/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Years:2015-16 & 2018-19 Shri Ragupathy Murugan, 80, Mararajapuram, Mariyamman Kovil Street, Villupuram – 605 602. PAN: BLTPM 8322G Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Villupuram. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Ms. Nidhi Jain, 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: These appeals filed at the instance of the assessee are directed against two different orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, both dated 21.08.2024 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Years are 2015-16 & 2018-19. - 2 - ITA Nos.999 & 1000/CHNY/2025 2. There is a delay of 158 days in filing these appeals. The assessee has filed affidavits for condonation of delay stating therein the reasons for belated filing of this appeal. The reasons stated in the affidavit for belated filing is that, the assessee was not well and due to prolonged illness, he was under medical observation and was not in a position to respond or look into any hearing notices issued during appeal proceedings nor file appeal before the Tribunal with time allowed. The assessee has produced medical certificate in support of his contention. On perusal of the aforesaid reason stated, we are of the view that the assessee cannot be faulted for non-filing the appeal on time. There is sufficient reason and no latches can be attributed to the assessee for belated filing of this appeal. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 3. At the very outset, we notice that the orders of First Appellate Authority (FAA) are ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to various notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. Further, we also note that the assessments have been completed on best judgment basis u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act. 4. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee has studied only upto 3rd standard and not being literate and having technical knowledge of income tax laws, procedure, the assessee was - 3 - ITA Nos.999 & 1000/CHNY/2025 entirely depended on a local accountant for maintaining records and filing the returns. The assessee relied on his accountant to assist in appellate proceedings. Only after passing the order, the assessee was informed that no action was taken for notices issue. Further, the assessee was not well and due to prolonged illness, he was under medical observation and hence, not in a position to respond to notices issued during the course of assessment and appellate proceedings. The LR has produced medical certificate in support of his contention. The Ld.AR further submitted that since assessee being illiterate has not filed his return of income and the assessments have been completed on best judgment basis u/s.144 of the Act. 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. 5. The ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the office of the FAA and AO and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was prayed the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed. 6. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceedings before the AO as well as the FAA were ex- parte, since the assessee did not respond to various notices issued and the assessment orders are best judgment assessments u/s.144 of the - 4 - ITA Nos.999 & 1000/CHNY/2025 Act since assessee has not filed his return of income. We note that the assessee was not well during the assessment and appellate proceedings. However, we strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices issued from the offices of the FAA & AO. 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. 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. 7. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are 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. "