Y.ANTHONYSAMY,PANRUTI V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, CUDDALORE

ITA 1579/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Y. Anthonisamy against the order of the Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Lucknow, which was passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The appeal was initially filed late, and the assessee provided reasons for the delay, which the Tribunal found sufficient. The primary contention in the appeal was the ex-parte nature of the order passed by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) and the best judgment assessment made under sections 144 and 147 of the Act. The assessee, who had minimal formal education and was unaware of the income tax proceedings, did not respond to several notices, leading to an ex-parte decision. The Tribunal, acknowledging the assessee's lack of awareness and the nonchalant attitude towards the notices, decided to restore the matter to the AO for a fair hearing, imposing a cost to ensure seriousness in compliance.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711868 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V. SREENIVASAN
• Assessee Lawyers: HITESH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

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 No.: 1579/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Y. Anthonisamy, 41-Andavar Nagar, 1st Street, Panikankuppan, Panruti – 607 106. PAN: AOKPA 3874N Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 4, Cuddalore. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Hitesh, Advocate for Shri D. Anand, Advocate ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 23.07.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 25.07.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Lucknow dated 05.12.2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2011-12. 2. There is a delay of 91 days in filing the appeal. The appeal ought to have been filed before ITAT on or before 28.02.2025. However, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1579/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: the appeal was filed belatedly on 30.05.2025. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay and affidavit stating there in the reasons for belated filing of this appeal. The reasons stated is that the assessee inadvertently missed to file the appeal. Only on 20.03.2025, the assessee realized that appeal was not filed. Hence, immediately on 20.03.2025 assessee paid the appeal fees and instructed his authorized representative to prepare appeal papers. Later the appeal papers were prepared and filed before the Tribunal on 30.05.2025 with delay. On perusal of the same, we find there is sufficient cause for delay in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. We also find that the assessee has got a prima facie case on merits. 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 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. Further, we also notice that the assessment has been completed on best judgment assessment u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 4. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the order passed by the FAA is ex-parte and the assessment has also been completed on best Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1579/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: judgment basis u/s.144 of the Act. The Ld.AR further submitted that the assessee has studied only upto 5th standard and was doing business on a small scale to carry on his livelihood. The assessee has not filed his return of income in any of the previous year or relevant assessment year or subsequent to the assessment year as his income was below the taxable limit. Therefore, the assessee was unaware of the income-tax proceedings and did not check the income tax portal. Therefore, the assessee was unaware of the hearing notices issued during the assessment and appellate proceedings. 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. 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. 6. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceedings before the AO as well as the FAA was ex- parte, since the assessee did not respond to various notices issued. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee was unaware of the income- tax proceedings and did not take note of the notices issued by the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1579/Chny/2025 :- 4 -: FAA in the income tax portal. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices issued from the offices of the FAA and 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.5,000/- (Rupees 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.5,000/- 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. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 25th 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 25th July, 2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1579/Chny/2025 :- 5 -: 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 "