SIVALINGAM THANKABABY,TIRUNELVELI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TIRUNELVELI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1931/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 June 2026AY 2021-20223 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay. The matter was remanded to the CIT(A) to consider the delay condonation petition and adjudicate the issue on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 217 days against a penalty order. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine due to the delay, without considering the reasons provided by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay without appreciating the assessee's reasons for the delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 249(3)

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. 1931/Chny/2026 िनधा'रण वष'/Assessment Year: 2021-22 Sivalingam Thankababy, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 11/2, Second Yadaavar East Street, Ward - 4, Palayamkottai, Tirunelveli – 627 011. Tirunelveli – 627 002. [PAN: AHMPB-2477-R] (अपीलाथ*/Appellant) (+,थ*/Respondent) अपीलाथ* की ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. Thankababy, Party in person +,थ* की ओर से/Respondent by : Mr. S. 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 04.12.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi for the assessment year 2021-22.

2.

We find that the assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) against the penalty order u/s. 270A of the Income-tax Act, 196 (herein after “the

2 ITA No. 1931/Chny/2026

Act”) with a delay of 217 days. The ld.CIT(A) having not satisfied with the

reasons stated by the assessee dismissed the appeal in limine vide his

reasoning from para no. 5.5 to 6.1 of the impugned order.

3.

At the time of hearing, the assessee submits that the assessee was

unaware of the assessment proceedings due to communication gap with

the earlier tax consultant. No direct communication was received by the

assessee and assessee acted primarily in filing the appeal before the

ld.CIT(A) upon gaining knowledge of passing of penalty order. She argued

that delay was Bonafide and deserves to be condoned u/s. 249(3) of the

Act. Further, she argued that the ld.CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal

solely on the ground of delay of 217 days without appreciating the

assessee had demonstrated sufficient cause for such delay. She submits

that the order of the ld.CIT(A) is liable to be set aside to adjudicate issues

on merit and pleaded to remand the matter to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for

condonation of delay as the assessee is ready to prosecute her case

without fail.

4.

The ld.DR, Mr. S. Manoj Prakash, JCIT, relied on the order of the

ld.CIT(A)

3 ITA No. 1931/Chny/2026

5.

Heard both the parties and taking into consideration the submissions of the assessee, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the ld.CIT(A) to consider the delay condonation petition, condone the delay and adjudicate the issue on merits. Thus, the order of the ld.CIT(A) is set aside and grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

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 16:11:35 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →