SRI SAKTHIMAAN FIREWORKS INDUSTRIES, VIRUDHUNAGAR,VIRUDHUNAGAR V. ITO WARD-3, VIRUDHUNAGAR, VIRUDHUNAGAR

ITA 4049/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sri Sakthimaan Fireworks Industries, the appellant, contesting an order from 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 2014-15. The primary contention was the ex-parte nature of the FAA's decision due to the assessee's non-compliance with multiple notices. The assessee, represented by Shri Vishnu Sumanth, Advocate, argued that the lack of response was due to oversight in a rural setting. The respondent, represented by Shri Aroon Praasad, Addl.CIT, contended that sufficient opportunities were provided. The Tribunal, acknowledging the procedural lapses and the assessee's legal contention regarding the notice under section 143(2), decided to restore the matter to the AO for a comprehensive re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 840587 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AROON PRAASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: VISHNU SUMANTH
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings; 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 एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 4049/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sri Sakthimaan Fireworks Industries, 2/47, Pillayar Kovil Street, T. Managaseri B.O, Samynatham, Virudhunagar – 626 141. PAN: ABXFS 8045F Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3, Virudhunagar (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Vishnu Sumanth, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Aroon Praasad, Addl.CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25.02.2026 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 26.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 27.11.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2014-15. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4049/CHNY/2025 :- 2 -: 2. At the very outset, we notice that the order passed by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to three notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. 4. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the order passed by the FAA is ex-parte. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessee is from a village and has failed to take note of the hearing notices issued from the office of the FAA and hence, the appellate proceedings remained ex-parte. The Ld.AR further submitted that before AO also the assessee has responded partially and has not furnished the complete details. Moreover, before the Tribunal, the assessee has also raised a legal ground stating that notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was not issued in the reassessment proceedings Since, the assessee has not represented its case fully before the AO, 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 its case. 5. 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.4049/CHNY/2025 :- 3 -: 6. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceedings before the FAA 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 FAA. Since the assessee has not furnished the complete details before the AO and the assessee has raised a legal ground before the Tribunal stating that notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was not issued in the reassessment proceedings, 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 along with the legal issue raised before the Tribunal. 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, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th February, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (एस.आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 26th February, 2026 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4049/CHNY/2025 :- 4 -: RSR आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Madurai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "