What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(A) violated principles of natural justice by rejecting the delay condonation application without a proper hearing. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

The assessee, a cooperative bank, filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a significant delay. The CIT(A) refused to condone the delay without a speaking order, citing various case laws.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in refusing to condone the delay in filing the appeal without providing a proper opportunity to the assessee and without passing a speaking order.

The Srirangam Cooperative Urban… vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 11.05.2026Pronounced: 07.07.2026

आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld.CIT(A)’), Delhi, dated 29.01.2026 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘AY’) 2017-18.

ITA Nos.1353/Chny/2026 (AY.2017-18) The Srirangam Cooperative Urban Bank Limited :: 2 :: 2. At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in refusing to condone the delay of 4 years 30 days in filing of the appeal before him. According to the Ld.AR, the assessee is a Co-operative bank functioning under the provisions of the Co-operative Societies Act and is a government aided institution established mainly to serve its members and the general public. According to him, the assessee bank is not engaged in any commercial or private activities. According to the Ld.AR, in this case, the AO has passed the assessment order dated 30.12.2019 adding the entire deposits during the demonetization period to the tune of Rs.4,39,38,500/- without giving proper opportunity to the assesssee. According to him the COVID Pandemic came from March 20 (within 2 and half months) and if the Pandemic period is excluded the delay will be less than 1 and half years. However, the Ld.CIT(A) without considering the merit of the application filed for condoning the delay has rejected the same without passing speaking order. Hence, he pleaded for one more opportunity before the Ld.CIT(A).

Per contra, Ld.DR does not want us to interfere with the impugned action of the Ld.CIT(A) and wants us to dismiss the appeal of the assessee.

Having heard both the parties and perused the records. It is noted that the AO passed the assessment on 30.12.2019 adding the entire cash

ITA Nos.1353/Chny/2026 (AY.2017-18) The Srirangam Cooperative Urban Bank Limited :: 3 :: deposits made during the demonetization period to the tune of Rs.4,39,38,500/-. Assessee is noted to have filed the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) on 29.02.2024 with a delay of more that 4 (four) years. The Ld.CIT(A) refused to condone the delay being not satisfied with the explanation of the assessee and hence refused to condone the delay after citing several case laws. The assessee is noted to be a co-operative bank functioning under provisions of Co-operative Societies Act and is a government aided institution established primarily to serve its members and general public; and it claims that it is not engaged in any commercial or private activities. The Ld.AR cited COVID 19 Pandemic as one of the reasons for the cause of delay, and the other reasons which led to delay, has not been appreciated by the Ld.CIT(A) while disposing of the application for condoning the delay.

Be that as it may, without hearing the assessee the Ld.CiT(A) is noted to have rejected the application for condoning the delay. Hence, there is a violation of natural justice and hence we set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to the file of Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to consider the application for condoning the delay afresh and give an opportunity to the assessee through video conferencing if sought and thereafter, to decide on its merits the ibid

ITA Nos.1353/Chny/2026 (AY.2017-18) The Srirangam Cooperative Urban Bank Limited :: 4 :: application, in accordance to law and thereafter to pass orders in accordance to law.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on the 07th day of July 2026, in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (एबी टी. वक�) (S.R.RAGHUNATHA) (ABY T. VARKEY) लेखा सद�/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 07th July, 2026. YS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

Digitally signed YASHVI by YASHVIR SINGH R SINGH Date: 2026.07.10 12:08:57 +05'30'

THE SRIRANGAM COOPERATIVE URBAN BANK LIMITED,TIRUCHIRAPALLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER CIRCLE 1(1) , TIRUCHIRAPALLI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments