NARAYANAN KAVITHA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-9(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1983/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 September 2026AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and, considering the assessee's non-compliance before the lower appellate authority, remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The assessee was granted an opportunity to file relevant material and evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 67 days, which was condoned by the tribunal due to bona fide reasons. The assessee also challenged the jurisdiction of the JAO in passing an order under Section 148A(d).

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the matter should be remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration due to non-compliance and jurisdictional challenge.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Hearing: 21.07.2026Pronounced: 18.09.2026

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10.11.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2019-20. 2. We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 67 days. The assessee filed an affidavit accompanied by a petition explaining the reasons. On perusal of the same and upon hearing both the parties, we find that the reasons explained by the assessee are bona fide, which really prevented the assessee from filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay of 67 days is condoned.

3.

Ld. AR, Mr. Naresh Singh Rathore, FCA, drew our attention to ground No. 2 raised by the assessee with reference to the challenge to the juri iction of the JAO in passing the order under Section 148A(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) and prayed to remand to Ld. CIT(A). Further, we find the assessee remained non-compliant before the Ld. CIT(A), which is evident from paras Nos. 7.2.3, 7.3.7, 7.5.6, 7.6.7 and 7.7.2 of the impugned order. Therefore, considering the non-compliance of the assessee and the undertaking of the Ld. AR, we are of the considered view that the assessee shall get one more opportunity before the Ld. CIT(A) in order to prosecute his case by filing the relevant material and evidence in support of his claim. Thus, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of his claim. Thus, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 18th September, 2026 at Chennai. (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 18.09.2026 MM/- आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant, 2.""थ"/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु"/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय "ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड" फाईल/GF.

Digitally signed MANISH by MANISH MISHRA MISHRA Date: 2026.09.23 15:55:09 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 148A(d)

All 544 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A(d) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →