What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the delay of 131 days before it, subject to a cost of Rs. 25,000. The ITAT directed the CIT(A) to condone the delay of 249 days before it, subject to a cost of Rs. 10,000, and to adjudicate the issue on merits.

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 131 days before the ITAT. The assessee had also filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 249 days. The assessee sought condonation of these delays.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the condonation of delays in filing appeals before the ITAT and the CIT(A). The secondary issue was to provide an opportunity to the assessee to present its case on merits.

Double T Infrastructure LLP. vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2026

Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

Hearing: 18.08.2026Pronounced: 20.08.2026

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.11.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2022-23. :-2-: ITA No: 3444/Chny/2026

This appeal was filed with a delay of 131 days and the assessee

filed petition to condone accompanied by notarized affidavit dated

09.06.

2026 explaining reasons for the said delay. Upon hearing both

the parties and taking into consideration the length of time of 131 days,

we are of the considered opinion that such delay of 131 days shall be condoned on a condition of payment of cost of Rs.25,000/- in favour of the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

The ld.AR, Mr. S. Girish Kumar, Advocate, submits that the assessee filed an appeal against the order dated 12.12.2024 passed by the AO with a delay of 249 days before the ld.CIT(A). He drew our

attention to the impugned order in para no. 5 and submits that the ld.CIT(A) may be directed to consider the delay condonation petition and to condone the said delay. On merits he argued that the assessee is ready to furnish all relevant details before the ld.CIT(A), if this Tribunal

affords one more opportunity for consideration of issue on merits.

The ld.DR, Ms. R. Anita, CIT, reported no objection.

:-3-: ITA No: 3444/Chny/2026

Considering the submissions of the ld.AR and ld.DR with reference

to facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion

that the assessee shall get one more opportunity before the ld.CIT(A).

Therefore, the ld.CIT(A) is directed to consider the delay condonation

petition and condone the said delay subject to satisfaction of payment

of cost of Rs.10,000/- in favour of the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services

Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within 30 days from the date

of receipt of this order and the ld.CIT(A) shall satisfy the said payment

of cost and to condone the delay of 249 days and proceed to adjudicate

the issue on merits. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of its case. Thus, order of the ld.CIT(A) is set aside and grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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

purposes. Order pronounced on 20th August, 2026 at Chennai. (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated: 20.08.2026 JPV

:-4-: ITA No: 3444/Chny/2026

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 PRASANNA VANI JETTY VANI JETTY Date: 2026.08.24 12:01:18 +05'30'

DOUBLE T INFRASTRUCTURE LLP.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-10(1), CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments