M/S. ARIMA EXIM PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1886/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 June 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It held that the CIT(A) was not justified in treating the appeal as withdrawn, as the statute preserves the right of appeal even if VSV proceedings fail.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-compliance with Form-3 under the VSV Act, 2020. The assessee explained that they could not comply with Form-3 for various reasons and argued that their right of appeal should not be taken away if VSV proceedings fail.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was correct in dismissing the appeal for non-compliance with Form-3 under the VSV Act, 2020, and whether the assessee's right of appeal is extinguished in such circumstances.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 249

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Hearing: 16.06.2026Pronounced: 30.06.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ ए’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ 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. 1886/Chny/2026 िनधा'रण वष'/Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s. Arima Exim Private Limited, Vs. Deputy Commissioner of No.2/89, 1st Floor, Income Tax, Ciscons Complex, Central Circle -3(3), Montieth Road, Egmore, Chennai. Chennai – 600 008. [PAN: AAJCA-1046-Q] (अपीलाथ*/Appellant) (+,थ*/Respondent) अपीलाथ* की ओर से / Appellant by : Mr. K. Vishva Padmanaban, CA +,थ* की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. R. Anita, CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 16.06.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 30.06.2026 : 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 30.05.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai for the assessment year 2017-18.

2.

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 244 days. The assessee filed an affidavit explaining the reasons to condone the said

2 ITA No. 1886/Chny/2026

delay. On perusal of the same and upon hearing both the parties, we find

the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide which really prevented

the assessee in filing the appeal in time. Thus, delay of 244 days

condoned.

3.

At the outset, it is noted that the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the

assessee for non-compliance of Form-3 issued by the Designated Authority

under VSV Act, 2020. The ld.AR, Mr. K. Vishva Padmanaban, CA, submits

that the assessee availed VSVS scheme and could not be proceeded in

compliance of Form-3 for various reasons. He argued that the order of the

ld.CIT(A) is not justified in treating the appeal of the assessee as construed

as withdrawn and as the assessee having right of invoking right of appeal,

in case the proceedings under VSV Act, 2020 fails.

4.

Admittedly, the Designated Authority issued Form-3 on 16.02.2021

and no compliances was made with reference to payment of tax in

pursuance of Form-3. We find force in the arguments of the ld.AR that in

case the proceedings under VSV Act, 2020 fails, the statue does not take

away right of appeal before the ld.CIT(A). Therefore, the order of the

ld.CIT(A) is not justified in treating the appeal filed u/s. 249 of the Act as

withdrawn as per proceedings under VSV Act, 2020. Thus, order of the

3 ITA No. 1886/Chny/2026

ld.CIT(A) is set aside and we deem it proper to remand the matter to the ld.CIT(A) for a fresh consideration, taking into account Form-35 filed on 30.01.2020 u/s. 249 of the Act. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 30th June, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Chennai, Dated: 30.06.2026 JPV आदेश की +ितिलिप अ3ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ*/Appellant, 2.+,थ*/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु4/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय +ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड' फाईल/GF.

PRASANNA Digitally signed by PRASANNA VANI JETTY VANI JETTY Date: 2026.07.02 16:11:59 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 249

All 507 judgments and leading authorities on Section 249 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →