ARULMIGU SOUNDARAJA PERUMAL,THIRUKOVIL vs. ITO, DINDIGUL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1904/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 June 2026AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the 2-day delay in filing the present appeal and remanded the matter to the CIT(A) to consider the assessee's delay condonation petition afresh. The assessee was directed to file a detailed petition with day-to-day reasons.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a significant delay of 445 days against an order passed by the AO. The CIT(A) rejected the appeal in limine due to the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and the appeal considered on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Hearing: 15.06.2026Pronounced: 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.1904/Chny/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Arulmigu Soundaraja Perumal Vs. The ITO, Thirukovil, Ward-I, Dindigul. 01, Thoppur, Thadikombu S.O, Dindigul, Tamil Nadu, 624 709. [PAN: AAETA8118R] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Mr. T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Mr. Manoj Prakash, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 15.06.2026 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 16.01.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2018-19.

2.

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 02 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 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 02 days is condoned.

2 I.T.A. No.1904/Chny/26

3.

At the outset, we find that the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 445 days against the order dated 28.03.2024 passed by the AO under Section 147 read with Sections 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, wherein the AO determined the income of the assessee at ₹1,56,95,323/- on account of unexplained money and disallowance of interest. The ld. CIT(A) rejected the appeal of the assessee in limine for not filing a proper application to condone the delay of 445 days.

4.

Ld. AR Mr. T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A., pleaded that one more opportunity may be granted by giving a direction to the ld. CIT(A) to consider the delay condonation petition that may be filed.

5.

Ld. DR Mr. Manoj Prakash, JCIT, reported no objection.

6.

Considering the submissions of the ld. AR and DR and in view of the above nature of the addition made by the AO, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for his fresh consideration of the delay condonation petition that may be filed by the assessee. We also direct the assessee to file a delay condonation petition explaining the reasons on a day-to-day basis for the consideration of the ld. CIT(A), and the ld. CIT(A) shall consider the same and pass the order in accordance with law. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of his claim showing sufficient cause for the delay. Thus, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

3 I.T.A. No.1904/Chny/26

7.

In the result, the appeal of 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 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 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →