Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Salem Cable Television Network Pvt. ... vs Dcit, Circle-1(1), , Salem on 27 April, 2026
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, 'डी' यायपीठ, चे नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'D' BENCH, CHENNAI ी जॉज जॉज के, उपा य एवं सु ी प मावती एस, लेखा सद य के सम BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENTAND MS PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 1135/CHNY/2026 िनधारण वष/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Salem Cable Television The Deputy Commissioner Network Pvt. Ltd., Vs. of Income Tax, 103-N, Tamil Sangam Road, Circle 1(1), Shankar Nagar, Salem Salem - 636 007.
PAN: AAICS 5735P (अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent) अपीलाथ क ओर से/Appellant by : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, FCA (Through Virtual Mode) यथ क ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Praveen S, Addl.CIT सुनवाई क तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21.04.2026 घोषणा क तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 27.04.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 03.12.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'). The relevant Assessment Year is 2012-13.
:- 2 -: ITA No.1135/Chny/2026
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.
3. The Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee was unaware of the hearing notices issued by the FAA, as its name had been struck off the rolls of ROC. It was therefore prayed that, in the interest of justice and equity, the matter be restored to the file of the FAA, granting the assessee one final opportunity to properly represent its case.
4. The Ld.DR supported the order of the FAA.
5. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceeding before the FAA was ex-parte, since the assessee did not respond to the notices issued. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee's name had been struck off the rolls of the ROC and hence, the assessee was unaware of the hearing notices issued by the FAA. The Ld. AR submitted that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to represent its case before the FAA and undertook that he would duly appear and furnish the necessary details as and when called for. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant :- 3 -: ITA No.1135/Chny/2026 attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices issued from the office of the FAA. However, considering the submissions of the Ld. AR and 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 as a last opportunity. 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 27th April, 2026 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/-
(प मावती एस) (जॉज जॉज के)
(PADMAVATHY S) (GEORGE GEORGE K)
लेखा सद य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपा य /VICE PRESIDENT
चे ई/Chennai,
दनांक/Dated, the 27th April, 2026
RSR
आदे श क त ल प अ े षत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ /Appellant
2. यथ /Respondent
3. आयकर आयु त /CIT, Salem
4. वभागीय त न ध/DR By Order
5. गाड फाईल/GF. Digitally signed by
REKHA REKHA SENTHIL RAJ
SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.04.28
10:22:55 +05'30'