आयकर अपील(cid:547)य अ(cid:876)धकरण, ‘ए’ Ûयायपीठ, चÛे नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI (cid:302)ी जॉज (cid:91) जॉज (cid:91) के, उपाÚय¢ एवं (cid:302)ी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदèय के सम¢

BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.:833/CHNY/2026 िनधा(cid:6981)रण वष(cid:6981)/Assessment Year: 2019-20 The Tamil Nadu Dr. The Income Tax Officer Ambedkar Law University, Vs. (Exemptions), No.5, Poompozhil Campus, Ward 1, Dr. DGS Dinakaran Salai, Chennai.

Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai – 600 028.

PAN: AADAT 3528N (अपीलाथ(cid:7278)/Appellant) ((cid:7079)(cid:7004)यथ(cid:7278)/Respondent)

अपीलाथ(cid:7278) क(cid:7409) ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate (cid:7079)(cid:7004)यथ(cid:7278) क(cid:7409) ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Ann Mary Baby, CIT सुनवाई क(cid:7409) तारीख/Date of Hearing : 05.03.2026 घोषणा क(cid:7409) तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 06.03.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Pune order dated 27.01.2026 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2019-20

2. Brief facts of the case are as follows: For the assessment year 2019-20, assessee trust had not filed its return of income. Notice u/s.148 of the Act was issued and in response to the same, assessee filed its return declaring ‘nil’ income. Reassessment was completed by accepting ‘nil’ income vide order dated 12.12.2023 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act. Thereafter rectification order u/s.154 r.w.s. 147 of the Act was passed on 24.12.2024. In the said rectification order, the accumulated income claimed was disallowed for the reason, audit report in Form 10AB along with the return of income was not filed within the due date prescribed u/s.139(1) of the Act.

3. Aggrieved by the order of rectification passed on 24.12.2024, assessee filed appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA confirmed the order passed by the AO u/s.154 of the Act and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

4. Aggrieved by the order of FAA, assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has raised multiple grounds. One of the grounds raised namely, Ground No.2 reads as follows:

“Rectification u/s 154 passed without notice is invalid:

The CIT(Appeals) failed to appreciate that the JAO Suo moto passed a rectification order u/s.154 r.w.s.147 of the Act 24.12.2024 withdrawing the benefit of accumulation of income granted in the order u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act in gross violation of principles of natural justice is illegal, without jurisdiction and deserves to be quashed. This is settled law as per plethora of decisions including jurisdictional ITAT in Iljin Automotive vs. ACIT (ITA 1494/Chny/2024 dated 26.5.25).”

5. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessment order was passed accepting ‘nil’ income filed by the assessee. Consequent to the rectification order dated 24.12.2024, demand of Rs.9,23,01,237/- was raised against the assessee trust. It was submitted by the Ld.AR that prior to passing of the order of rectification u/s.154 r.w.s.147 of the Act, assessee was not served with a notice u/s.154(3) of the Act. It was submitted that since the order is passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice, the same deserves to be quashed. In support of his submission, the Ld.AR relied on the order of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Iljin Automotive (P.) Ltd., reported in [2025] 213 ITD 88.

6. This case was originally fixed for hearing on 04.03.2026. The Bench directed the Ld.DR to peruse the assessment records to see whether notice u/s.154(3) of the Act was issued to the assessee prior to passing of order u/s.154 r.w.s.147 of the Act on

24.12.2024. The Ld.DR on 05.03.2026 fairly admitted that there is nothing on record to suggest notice has been issued prior to rectification order passed u/s.154 o