What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee may have missed the notices due to the pandemic and subsequent issuance. Therefore, one more opportunity was granted to the assessee to present their case.

The assessee filed an appeal with a significant delay, which was condoned. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) for hearings, despite notices. The ITAT noted that notices were issued during the Covid-19 pandemic and later in 2024, which might have escaped the assessee's attention.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their appeal before the CIT(A) given the circumstances of notice issuance and non-appearance.

California Software Co, Ltd… vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 18.03.2026

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

This captioned Appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against

the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 21.11.2024 for

Assessment Year 2013-14.

ITA No 27/Chny/2026 (AY 2013-14) California Software Co, Ltd (Vs.) ITO CORP WARD 1 36) :: 2 :: 2. The Registry has noted a delay of 339 days in filing the appeal.

Having considered the affidavit filed by the Director of the Company

and being satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown, the delay

is condoned. Accordingly, the appeal is admitted for adjudication.

Before the ld.CIT(A), the Assessee did not appear despite notices

issued for hearing. The ld.AR for the assessee prayed for one

opportunity of hearing before the CIT(A).

Per Contra, the Ld.DR pleaded for the dismissal of the appeal and

supported the order of the CIT(A).

We have duly considered the submissions advanced by both

parties and examined the material available on record. We find that

maximum number of notices issued during Covid-19 pandemic and

thereafter suddenly notices issued in the year 2024 which

inadvertently escaped the attention of the assessee. In our

considered view, one more opportunity may be afforded to the

assessee to explain and justify the grounds of the appeal.

Accordingly, the matter is remanded to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for

fresh adjudication of the appeal on merits. The assessee is also

directed to appear before the ld.CIT(A) and prosecute the appeal

diligently. It is directed that, prior to undertaking fresh adjudication,

ITA No 27/Chny/2026 (AY 2013-14) California Software Co, Ltd (Vs.) ITO CORP WARD 1 36) :: 3 :: the assessee shall be afforded a reasonable and effective

opportunity of being heard. 6. In the result, Appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

purposes.

Order pronounced on the 11th day of May, 2026 in Chennai. Sd/- (मनु कुमार िग�र) Sd/- (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) (S.R.RAGHUNATHA) �या�यक सद*य/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद*य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, +दनांक/Dated:11th May, 2026. SNDP, Sr. PS 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

CALIFORNIA SOFTWARE CO, LTD.,KANCHIPURAM vs. ITO, CORPORATE WARD-1(3), CHENNAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Latest GST High Court judgments