SIVAMALAI KALAVALLI,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, WARD-1,, TIRUCHENGODE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1470/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 July 2026AY 2015-165 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order, remitting the matter back. The CIT(A) was directed to consider the assessee's plea for condoning the delay after hearing the assessee and allowing them to file supporting documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for a delay of 419 days in filing. The assessee claimed the delay was due to non-awareness of the assessment order, attributing it to their Chartered Accountant's inaction and incorrect email ID usage.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned, considering the assessee's explanation involving their Chartered Accountant's alleged failure to communicate the assessment order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not explicitly mentioned in the provided text

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

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

Hearing: 13.05.2026Pronounced: 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 (Appeal)/NFAC, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld.CIT(A)’), Delhi dated 17.02.2026 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as the ‘AY’) 2015-16.

ITA No.1470/Chny/2026(AY 2015-16) Sivamalai Kalavalli :: 2 :: 2. At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has not decided the ground of appeal raised by the assessee on merits, rather he has dismissed the appeal by refusing to condone the delay of 419 days in filing of the appeal before him. According to the Ld.AR, despite the assessee explaining the delay, the Ld.CIT(A) ignored the same, and without giving proper opportunity to the assessee for explaining the delay, has dismissed the appeal. Hence, he pleaded that one more opportunity may be given before the Ld.CIT(A) so that he can explain and justify the cause for delay as well as file relevant documents to establish it.

3.

Per contra, the Ld.DR submitted that the assessee merely made assertions while explain the cause for delay, without filing any supporting evidence. Hence, the Ld.CIT(A) has refused to condone the delay of 419 days in filing of the appeal before him and therefore he does not want us to give one more opportunity to the assessee.

4.

Having heard both the parties and after perusal of the records, it is noted that the AO has reopened the assessment for AY 2015-16 and has determined total income at Rs.50,40,000/- by order dated 01.01.2024. The assessee is noted to have filed the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) on 25.03.2025 and has attributed the cause for the delay due to non- awareness of the existence of the assessment order. According to the

ITA No.1470/Chny/2026(AY 2015-16) Sivamalai Kalavalli :: 3 :: assessee, the email ID given to the department was that of the Chartered Accountant (CA) Shri R.Ganesan, No.115/2-1, Katcheri Street, Velur Road, Tiruchengode, Tamil Nadu-637211 but gave his personal email-id [psrgca037@rediffmail.com], rather than giving the assessee’s email ID. According to the Ld.AR, the Chartered Accountant, for reasons best known to him has neither participated in the assessment proceedings nor informed the assessee about the existence of the ex-parte assessment order. Because of which the assessee came to know only few days before the appeal could be filed on 25.03.2025. Hence, he pleaded for condoning the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). However, the Ld.CIT(A) has refused to condone the delay by stating that the assessee failed to substantiate the cause for the delay in filing of the appeal before him. The Ld.CIT(A) is noted to have blamed the assessee for not updating in the Income Tax Portal the correct email ID and therefore blamed the assessee for the cause of the delay, which reason given, may not be accepted for the simple reason that assessee having given the power of attorney to the Chartered Accountant to represent the case before the Income Tax Authorities, cannot be per-se blamed in this regard unless malafide intent could be found on the part of assessee. Be that as it may, if the assessee’s contention is correct, i.e. he has entrusted the matter to the Chartered Accountant Shri R.Ganesan and that CA has given his own email ID in the Income Tax Portal on behalf of the assessee

ITA No.1470/Chny/2026(AY 2015-16) Sivamalai Kalavalli :: 4 :: and if the said Chartered Accountant kept the assessee in the dark about the ongoing assessment proceedings and also the assessment order passed dated 01.01.2024 against the assessee, then assessee cannot be faulted for not filing of the appeal on time. However, the answers to the questions has to be found out by enquiry with the CA Shri R.Ganesan supra. And if the contentions of assessee is found to be correct, then the assessee should not be penalized, especially taking note that the AO also passed an ex-parte order qua the assessee. With the aforesaid observations, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to consider the plea of the assessee for condoning the delay in accordance with law after hearing the assessee. The assessee is at liberty to file documents to substantiate the cause for the delay and the Ld.CIT(A) after hearing pass order in accordance with law.

5.

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

Order pronounced on the 07th day of July, 2026, in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (एबी टी. वक�) (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (ABY T. VARKEY) (S.R.RAGHUNATHA) �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.1470/Chny/2026(AY 2015-16) Sivamalai Kalavalli :: 5 :: चे�ई/Chennai, िदनांक/Dated: 07th July, 2026. YS आदेश की �ितिलिप 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

YASH Digitally signed by YASHVIR SINGH VIR Date: 2026.07.10 SINGH 12:29:06 +05'30'

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →