CHINNAPPAN PALANISAMY,COIMBATORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, COIMBATORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1774/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeal before it and found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay. Therefore, the ITAT remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) to consider the delay condonation petition and decide the appeal on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a delay of 288 days, which the CIT(A) did not condone. The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was filed with a delay of 118 days, which the ITAT condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without condoning the delay, and if the delay should be condoned to allow the appeal to be heard on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Hearing: 13.05.2026Pronounced: 29.05.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी इंटूरी रामाराव, लेखा सद� एवं �ी एस.एस. िव�ने� रिव, �ाियक सद� के सम� । Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1774/Chny/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Chinnappan Palanisamy, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 6/36A, Bharathipuram Extention, Irugur Non- Corporate Ward 4(1), Coimbatore, Via, Pallapalayam, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu-641018. Tamil Nadu-641103. [PAN: ARCPP5176D] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Mr. Shrenik Chordia, C.A. ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 13.05.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 29.05.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.09.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment year 2018-19.

2.

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 118 days. The assessee filed an affidavit accompanied by a petition explaining the reasons. On perusal of the same and upon hearing both the parties, we

2 I.T.A. No.1774/Chny/26

find that the reasons explained by the assessee are bona fide, which really prevented the assessee from filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay of 118 days is condoned.

3.

We find that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without condoning the delay of 288 days. The assessee filed a delay condonation petition before the ld. CIT(A), the reasons of which the ld. CIT(A) held not acceptable, which is evident from para No.7 of the impugned order.

4.

The ld. AR Mr. Shrenik Chordia, C.A., prayed for one more opportunity as the assessee is ready to prosecute his case and shall appear before the ld. CIT(A) without fail.

5.

The ld. DR Ms. T. Mythili, JCIT, reported no objection.

6.

We find that the AO made addition on account of unexplained money under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’), which requires assistance and representation on behalf of the assessee, wherein the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay. Therefore, in the interest of justice, taking into account the nature of the addition, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to consider the delay condonation

3 I.T.A. No.1774/Chny/26

petition and condone the delay. The ld. CIT(A) shall adjudicate the issue on merits and the assessee shall appear before the ld. CIT(A) without fail. The assessee shall represent his case without fail and is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of his claim. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

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

Order pronounced on 29th May, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 29.05.2026 MM/- आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant, 2.��थ�/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड� फाईल/GF.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →