TVISHA CAPITAL INVESTMENTS CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED, CHENNAI,CHENNAI V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 3(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

ITA 1589/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Tvisha Capital Investments Consultancy Private Limited, which appealed against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The appeals were related to the assessment years 2017-18 and 2018-19. The FAA had dismissed the appeals ex-parte due to non-compliance and delay in filing, without a condonation application. The assessee, represented by Shri R.S. Lakshmi Narayana, Advocate, argued that the company had become defunct and was unaware of the assessments until penalty orders were received. The Departmental Representative, Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, CIT, opposed the appeal, citing adequate opportunities were provided. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances, decided to restore the matter to the FAA for a fresh decision post condonation of delay application.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711442 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V. SREENIVASAN
• Assessee Lawyers: R.S. LAKSHMI NARAYANA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; 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 PRESIDENTAND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 1586, 1587, 1588, 1589 & 1590/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 Tvisha Capital Investments Consultancy Private Limited, No.21/11, 2nd Floor, First Main Road, CIT Colony, Mylapore, Mylapore H.O., Chennai – 600 004. PAN: AACCT 9829P Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward – 3(1), Chennai. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri R.S. Lakshmi Narayana, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16.07.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 21.07.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the five different orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 10.03.2025/11.03.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.1586 to 1590/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Years are 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. At the very outset, we notice that the orders of First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to the three hearing notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. 3. We also notice that there is a delay in filing the appeals before the FAA and the assessee has not submitted the reasons for delay. The FAA has noted that though the assessee in Form 35 has stated that the reasons for condonation of delay and supporting documentary evidence will be furnished during the course of hearing, no application has been filed for condonation of delay and therefore, the appeals are not only delayed but defective. 4. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee is a company and it has become defunct and struck off from the rolls of Registrar of Companies (RoC), Chennai from the year 2018. It was submitted that the assessee could not respond to the Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.1586 to 1590/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: notices issued from the office of the AO, since assessee’s business was closed and there was no one taking care of administrative affairs of the company. It was stated that assessee company was aware of the assessment orders being passed only when assessee company received penalty orders and immediately, filed appeals before the First Appellate Authority with delay. The Ld.AR for the assessee pleaded that one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee company to explain the reason for belated filing of appeals before him and for proper representation of its case. 4. The ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the FAA and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was prayed the appeals of the assessee may be dismissed. 5. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The appeals filed by the assessee has been dismissed by the FAA by passing ex-parte orders. Admittedly, the assessee had not filed the condonation petition. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices issued from the offices of the FAA. However, in the Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.1586 to 1590/Chny/2025 :- 4 -: interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that the matter needs to be restored back to the files of the FAA. Accordingly, we restore the matter to the files of the FAA so that a proper condonation application can be filed by the assessee. On receipt of the same, the FAA shall pass orders in accordance with law. If the FAA is satisfied with the reasons given for condonation of delay, he shall consider the issue on merits afresh by affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. It is ordered accordingly. 6. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 21st July, 2025 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 21st July, 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. Printed from counselvise.com "