What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter back to the AO for fresh consideration. The assessee was directed to pay a cost of ₹10,000/-.

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 14 days, which was condoned by the tribunal. The tribunal considered the submissions of both the assessee and the revenue.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the delay in filing the appeal. The tribunal also considered the merits of the case for remanding it to the AO.

Jayachandran Naveen, Perambalur vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2026

आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, ’ए’ �ायपीठ,चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ीयस यस िव�ने� रिव, �ाियक सद� एवं सु�ीपदमावती यस, लेखा सद�के सम� BEFORE SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. PADMAVATHY.S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.3915/Chny/2026 िनधा�रणवष�/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Jayachandran Naveen, Vs. The ITO, Old No 2/46 New No 2/80 Siva Post Ward-1, Perambalur, Chennai, Perambalur. Tamil Nadu-621118. [PAN: AJUPN8454A] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by Mr. Sreemannarayana, Advocate : (Virtual) ��थ�कीओरसे/ Respondent by Mr. Anshu Sharawat, Addl. CIT : सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of hearing : 15.09.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement 22.09.2026 : आदेश /O R D E RJ PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.04.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21.

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 14 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

2 ITA No. 3915/Chny/2026 really prevented the assessee from filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay of 14 days is condoned.

Ld. DR, Mr. Anshu Sharawat, Addl. CIT, reported no objection.

Considering the submissions of the Ld. AR and DR and in the facts and circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the AO for fresh consideration, on payment of cost of ₹10,000/- in favour of the State Legal Services Authority at the Hon’ble High Court of Madras within a period of 32 days from the date of receipt of this order. The assessee shall furnish the proof of payment of cost, and the AO shall satisfy himself with the same and proceed to adjudicate the issues on merits. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of the claim. Thus, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 22nd September, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (S. PADMAVATHY) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) Accountant Member Judicial Member

Chennai, Dated: 22.09.2026 MM आदेशकी�ितिलिपअ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant,

3 ITA No. 3915/Chny/2026 2.��थ�/ Respondent, 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड�फाईल/GF.

MANISH Digitally signed by MANISH MISHRA MISHRA Date: 2026.09.23 15:45:53 +05'30'

JAYACHANDRAN NAVEEN,PERAMBALUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, PERAMBALUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments