RADOLABS LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE WARD 5(3), CHENNAI

आदेश/ O R D E R PER BENCH: These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against three orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi all dated 04.02.2026 passed

- 2 - ITA No.2601 to 2603/CHNY/2026 Radolabs Limited. under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2022-23.

- 3 - ITA No.2601 to 2603/CHNY/2026 Radolabs Limited. and penalty orders. First, let us deal with appellate order in respect of quantum addition in ITA No.2601/CHNY/2026 for assessment year 2022-23.

ITA No.2601/CHNY/2026 4. At the very outset, we notice that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) dismissed the assessee's appeal in limine without adjudicating the issues on merits. The FAA observed that there was a delay of 325 days in filing the appeal. The reason stated by the assessee in its petition for condonation of delay was that the notice of hearing and the order passed by the AO went to the spam folder and hence, assessee was unaware of the completion of assessment proceedings. The FAA held that the explanation was not acceptable and did not constitute sufficient cause for condoning the inordinate delay of 325 days. Accordingly, the FAA declined to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine.

- 4 - ITA No.2601 to 2603/CHNY/2026 Radolabs Limited. inadvertently delivered to the assessee's spam folder and, therefore, the assessee remained unaware of the assessment proceedings. It was submitted that the assessee came to know of the assessment order only upon receiving a call from the Jurisdictional AO regarding the outstanding demand, whereupon the assessee promptly filed an appeal before the FAA. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessment order passed by the AO under section 144 of the Act was also an ex parte order, as the assessee had no knowledge of the statutory notices issued during the course of the assessment proceedings. It was contended that the delay in filing the appeal before the FAA was occasioned by sufficient and bona fide reasons and was neither wilful nor deliberate. The Ld. AR, therefore, prayed that the delay be condoned and the matter be restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Ld. AR also undertook that the he would fully co-operate with the proceedings and furnish all necessary details and evidences as and when called upon to do so.

- 5 - ITA No.2601 to 2603/CHNY/2026 Radolabs Limited. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted position that the appeal filed by the assessee before the FAA was dismissed in limine on account of delay, without adjudicating the issues on merits. The explanation offered by the assessee is that the statutory notices issued by the AO as well as the assessment order, were inadvertently delivered to the spam folder of the assessee's registered e-mail account and, therefore, the assessee remained unaware of the assessment proceedings. According to the assessee, it came to know of the assessment order only upon being contacted by the Jurisdictional AO regarding the outstanding demand, whereafter it promptly preferred the appeal before the FAA. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the explanation furnished by the assessee constitutes a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the FAA. At the same time, the assessee cannot be completely absolved of its responsibility to periodically monitor its registered e-mail account and comply with statutory proceedings initiated under the Act. Therefore, while adopting a liberal approach to advance substantial justice, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay subject to the payment of costs of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty

- 6 - ITA No.2601 to 2603/CHNY/2026 Radolabs Limited. Five Thousand only) to be paid to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at the Hon’ble High Court of Madras. The amount of Rs.25,000/- 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.

ITA Nos.2602 & 2603/CHNY/2026 9. The assessee has filed these appeals against the appellate orders confirming the penalty levied by the AO u/s.271AAC / 270A of the Act. Since, we have already set aside the quantum appeal in ITA No.2601/CHNY/2026 to the files of the AO for fresh

- 7 - ITA No.2601 to 2603/CHNY/2026 Radolabs Limited. adjudication, we deem it appropriate to set aside the penalty orders to the files of the AO to decide along with the quantum appeal afresh. It is ordered accordingly.

Order pronounced in the open court on 3rd August,2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज� जॉज� के) (इंटूर� रामा राव) (GEORGE GEORGE K) (INTURI RAMA RAO) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपा�य� /VICE PRESIDENT चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 3rd August, 2026 RSR, Sr.PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Chennai 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 09:57:38 +05'30'