What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay, acknowledging the assessee's sufficient cause. While deprecating the assessee's non-response, the Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication as a last opportunity, imposing a cost.

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a significant delay due to health issues and lack of computer knowledge. The original assessment and first appeal order were passed ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the ex-parte assessment and appeal orders should be set aside to grant the assessee an opportunity to present their case.

Ragunathan Santhi, Karur vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & MS PADMAVATHY S

Hearing: 29.07.2026Pronounced: 03.08.2026

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 16.09.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2018-19.

- 2 - ITA No.1719/CHNY/2026 Ragunathan Santhi 2. There is a delay of 116 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit seeking condonation of the delay explaining therein the reason for delay. The reason stated is that owing to assessee’s health issues and lack of sufficient computer knowledge, the notices issued by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) and the appellate order uploaded on the Income-tax portal could not be noticed. It has been stated that the assessee came to know of the appellate order only upon receipt of a communication from the Department in February 2026, whereupon immediate steps were taken to file the present appeal. On perusal of the reasons stated, we are of the view that no latches can be attributed to the assessee as there is sufficient cause for belated filing of this appeal. Hence, we condone the delay and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.

At the very outset, we notice that the order of 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. Further, we also note that the assessment has been completed on best judgment basis r.w.s.144 of the Act.

The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee had inadvertently failed to take note of the notices issued by the FAA & AO. The Ld. AR, only pleaded that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee and the

- 3 - ITA No.1719/CHNY/2026 Ragunathan Santhi matter be restored to the file of the AO, so as to enable the assessee to effectively present her case and undertook that the he would duly appear and furnish the necessary details as and when called for.

The Ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the FAA & AO and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was submitted that the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. The proceedings before the AO as well as the FAA were ex-parte, since the assessee did not respond to various notices issued from the office of the AO & FAA. The Ld. AR submitted that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee to represent its case before the AO and undertook that he would duly appear and furnish the necessary details as and when called for. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the statutory notices issued by the FAA & AO. 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 AO as a last opportunity with a condition assessee pays a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to be paid to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The amount of

- 4 - ITA No.1719/CHNY/2026 Ragunathan Santhi Rs.10,000/- shall be paid within a month’s time from the date of receipt of this order and assessee shall produce the receipt for the said payment before the AO. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the files of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall be at liberty to raise all factual and legal contentions, including any fresh contentions available in law, before the AO and the same shall be considered on their own merits. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and furnish all requisite details and evidences in support of her claim and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd August, 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�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 3rd August, 2026 RSR, Sr.PS

- 5 - ITA No.1719/CHNY/2026 Ragunathan Santhi

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Madurai 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF. By Order Digitally signed by REKHA REKHA SENTHIL RAJ SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.08.05 09:52:30 +05'30'

RAGUNATHAN SANTHI,KARUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, KARUR

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