KEVIN ALPHONSE, COIMBATORE, TAMILNADU,COIMBATORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, NON-CORP WARD 4(1), COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1727/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2026AY 2018-20194 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have provided an opportunity to the assessee to explain the delay before dismissing the appeal. The delay was condoned in the interest of substantial justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a 2-day delay in filing without a condonation petition. The assessee explained the delay was due to a calculation error and sought condonation.

What were the issues?

Whether the dismissal of an appeal in limine for a minor delay without affording an opportunity for condonation is sustainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & MS PADMAVATHY S

Hearing: 14.05.2026Pronounced: 15.05.2026

आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 29.01.2026 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2018-19.

- 2 - ITA No.1727/CHNY/2026 Kevin Albhonse 2. At the very outset, we notice that First Appellate Authority (FAA) had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without adjudicating on merits. The FAA held that there is a delay of 2 days in filing the appeal before him and assessee has not filed petition for condonation of delay.

3.

On perusing the order of the FAA, we find that from Form 35, the FAA has noted that the assessee had filed the appeal on 28.01.2025 against the order of AO dated 28.12.2024, with a delay of 2 days but had not sought condonation of delay. Since the assessee has not filed a petition for condonation of delay, the FAA dismissed the appeal.

3.

Aggrieved by the order of the FAA, the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. Before us, the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before the FAA and sought condonation of the delay. It has been stated therein that the assessee had inadvertently considered the last date for filing the appeal as 28.01.2025 instead of 27.01.2025, since the date of the assessment order was 28.12.2024. Consequently, there occurred a delay of 1 day in filing the appeal before the FAA. It was further submitted by the ld.AR

- 3 - ITA No.1727/CHNY/2026 Kevin Albhonse that the FAA ought to have provided an opportunity to the assessee to file condonation application for the delay in filing the appeal before him, before dismissing the appeal in limine.

4.

The Ld.DR was duly heard.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The FAA had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without condoning the delay of 2 days in filing the appeal. The principles of natural justice require that an opportunity ought to have been granted to the assessee to explain the reasons for the delay and to show cause as to why such delay should not be condoned. The assessee has now filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay and, in our considered view, the reasons stated therein appear to be bonafide and reasonable. Considering the fact that the delay involved is only 1 day, and in the interest of substantial justice, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the FAA and direct the FAA to admit the appeal and adjudicate the issues on merits in accordance with law. Accordingly, the order of the FAA is set aside and the matter is restored to his file for fresh adjudication on merits. It is ordered accordingly.

- 4 - ITA No.1727/CHNY/2026 Kevin Albhonse

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 15th May,2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (प�मावती एस) (जॉज� जॉज� के) (PADMAVATHY S) (GEORGE GEORGE K) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपा�य� /VICE PRESIDENT चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 15th May, 2026 RSR, Sr.PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Coimbatore 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF. By Order Digitally signed by REKHA REKHA SENTHIL RAJ SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.05.18 17:16:25 +05'30'

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →