ARUNACHALAM THILLAINATHAN,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, NCW-2(1), COIMBATORE

There is a delay of 25 days in filing the appeal in ITA No. 1067/CHNY/2026. The assessee has filed a petition seeking condonation of the delay, explaining the reasons for the delay. It is submitted that the order of the First Appellate Authority was not brought to the knowledge of the assessee immediately. Further, the counsel, who is based in Chennai, had prepared the appeal papers and forwarded the same to the assessee for his signature. The transit and exchange of appeal papers between Coimbatore and Chennai involved unavoidable delay, resulting in the belated filing of the 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 note that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) has dismissed the appeals in limine without adjudicating the issues on merits. The FAA had not condoned the delay of 844 days in ITA No.1267/CHNY/2026, 839 days in ITA No.1270/CHNY/2026 and 644 days in ITA No.1271 & 1272/CHNY/2026 in filing the appeals before him. The FAA observed that the assessee had stated the reasons for

The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee’s spouse was suffering from medical issues / kidney failure and he is attending to her medical needs during that period. Though the assessee had stated the reason for delay, the FAA has dismissed the appeals of the assessee on the ground that the assessee has not filed any documentary evidence in support of his claim.

The Ld.DR supported the orders of the FAA.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. On perusal of the orders of the FAA, we note that though the assessee had stated reasons for the delay in filing the appeals, the FAA dismissed the same on the ground that the assessee failed to establish sufficient cause for condonation of delay. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee was attending to the medical needs of his spouse, which prevented him from filing the appeals within the prescribed time. We find that although the assessee has stated the reasons for the delay, no affidavit or supporting evidence has been furnished in support of the said claim. In the interest of justice and

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.