SAMPATH KUMAR SHAMUGAM,COIMBATORE vs. ACIT, NCC-4,, COIMBATORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1801/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 May 2026AY 2020-214 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had issued notices through the ITBA Portal which were not received by the assessee. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration, including condoning the delay and adjudicating the issue on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were dismissed by the CIT(A) in limine due to delays in filing. The assessee claimed non-receipt of notices issued through the ITBA Portal to a different email ID. The appeals were against penalty orders for non-compliance with a notice under Section 142(1).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals in limine without considering the reasons for delay, particularly when the assessee claimed non-receipt of notices.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 272A(1)(d),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Hearing: 13.05.2026Pronounced: 15.05.2026

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. Nos. 1800 & 1801/Chny/2026 िनधा(रण वष(/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Sampath Kumar Shanmugam, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of No. 44, West Logamaniya Street, Income Tax, Rathinasabapathy Puram, Non- Corporate Circle -4, Coimbatore – 641 002. Coimbatore. [PAN: AXCPS-7398-N] (अपीलाथ+/Appellant) (,-थ+/Respondent) अपीलाथ+ की ओर से / Appellant by : Mr. Girish Kumar, Advocate ,-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 15.05.2026 : आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders both dated 06.01.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [herein after “CIT(A)] for the assessment year 2020-21.

2.

Since issues raised in these appeals of the assessee are similar based on the same identical facts, with the consent of both the parties,

2 I.T.A. No I.T.A. Nos.1800 & 1801 I.T.A. No I.T.A. No 800 & 1801 800 & 1801/Chny/ 800 & 1801 /Chny/ /Chny/2026 /Chny/ 2026 2026 2026

we proceed to hear the appeals together and pass consolidated order

for the sake of convenience.

3.

First we shall take up ITA No: 1800/Chny/2026 for assessment

year 2020-21.

4.

We find the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee

inlimine on his non-satisfaction with reference to the reasons explained

by the assessee for the delay of 616 days, which is evident from para

no. 5 of the impugned order. We find assessee filed appeal before the

ld.CIT(A) against order u/s. 272A(1)(d) of the Income-tax Act, 1961

[hereinafter ‘the Act’] passed by the AO in imposing penalty for non-

compliance of notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act.

5.

The ld.AR, Mr. Girish Kumar, Advocate, prayed to remand the

matter to the file of the ld.CIT(A) as the notices issued by the first

appellate authority through ITBA Portal, wherein the said notices were

not received as were delivered to different e-mail ID.

6.

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

7.

Having heard both the parties, we find that the ld.CIT(A) issued

notices through ITBA Portal, wherein no notice was received by the

assessee in respect of penalty proceedings before the AO. Therefore,

considering the submissions of the ld.AR and in the facts and

3 I.T.A. No I.T.A. Nos.1800 & 1801 I.T.A. No I.T.A. No 800 & 1801 800 & 1801/Chny/ 800 & 1801 /Chny/ /Chny/2026 /Chny/ 2026 2026 2026

circumstances of the case, we deem it proper to remand the matter to

the file of the ld.CIT(A) for a fresh consideration to consider the delay

condonation petition and condone the delay. The ld.CIT(A) is directed

to adjudicate the issue on merits and pass the order in accordance

with law. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of

her claim. The assessee shall make compliance to the notices issued

by the ld.CIT(A) without fail. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee

are allowed for statistical purposes.

8.

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

purposes.

9.

Now, we take up ITA No. 1801/Chny/2026 for assessment year

2020-21.

10.

We find that this appeal also filed with a delay of 57 days before

ld.CIT(A) against penalty order imposed u/s. 272A(1)(d) of the Act.

The ld.AR adopted the same arguments as was argued in ITA No.

1800/Chny/2026.

11.

The ld.DR, did not dispute the same.

12.

Therefore, considering the submissions of the ld.AR and the

ld.DR and in the facts and circumstances of the case, following the

same view taken in ITA No. 1800/Chny/2026 in the aforementioned

4 I.T.A. No I.T.A. Nos.1800 & 1801 I.T.A. No I.T.A. No 800 & 1801 800 & 1801/Chny/ 800 & 1801 /Chny/ /Chny/2026 /Chny/ 2026 2026 2026

paras, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the

ld.CIT(A) for a fresh consideration and to consider the delay

condonation petition, condone the delay and adjudicate the issue on

merits. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of

her claim. The assessee shall make compliance to the notices issued

by the ld.CIT(A) without fail. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee

are allowed for statistical purposes.

13.

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

purposes. Order pronounced on 15th May, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated: 15.05.2026

JPV आदेश की ,ितिलिप अ4ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ+/Appellant, 2.,-थ+/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु5/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय ,ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड( फाईल/GF.

More judgments on Section 272A(1)(d)

All 1,125 judgments and leading authorities on Section 272A(1)(d) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →