MARAPPAN MOHANKUMAR,NAMAKKAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, NAMAKKAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1237/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and remitted the appeal back to the AO. The AO was directed to call for necessary details and decide the issue in accordance with the law, giving the assessee an opportunity to substantiate their claims.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual, did not file an income tax return. Upon receiving information of substantial financial transactions, the Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the case. The assessee eventually filed a return, but the AO made significant additions due to non-response to notices. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal due to a delay of 125 days without condoning it.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine without condoning the delay. Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present their case before the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: MS. PADMAVATHY.S & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI

For Respondent: Mr. Gautam S.Mukundan, JCIT

आदेश / O R D E R

PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M:

This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short "CIT(A)") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") dated 23.02.2026 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18.

2.

The assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income. The A.O received information that the assessee has substantial financial transactions during the year under consideration. Since the assessee did not

ITA No.1237/Chny/2026 Marappan Mohankumar :- 2 -:

file the return of income, the A.O reopened the assessee by issuing a notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The assessee in response filed the return of income declaring total income of Rs. 4,53,430/- with the turnover of Rs.3,67,81,506/- on 30.02.2024. The A.O called on the assessee to furnish various details from time of time. Since the assessee did not respond properly to the notices, the A.O made an addition of Rs.5,91,50,327/- towards unexplained credits, unexplained expenditure etc. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). There was a delay of 125 days in the filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A).

3.

We have heard the parties, and perused the material available on record. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee is not properly education and not aware of income tax matters and completely dependent on the tax consultant who did not handle matter properly and hence the delay. The ld. AR also submitted that the assessee's mother was suffering from cancer due to which the assessee was affected mentally due to which he could not concentrate on the tax proceedings. The Ld. AR accordingly prayed that one more opportunity may be given. Considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to assessee's case and in the interest of natural justice, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the claim by producing the required details. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and remit the appeal back to the A.O with a direction to call for necessary details and decide the issue in accordance with law. The assessee is

ITA No.1237/Chny/2026 Marappan Mohankumar :- 3 -:

required to submit the necessary details as may be called for and cooperate with appellate proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

4.

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

Order pronounced on 13th day of May, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (मनु कुमार िग#र) (पदमावती यस) (Manu Kumar Giri) (Padmavathy.S) लेखा सद�य लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य �याियक �याियक सद�य �याियक �याियक सद�य सद�य / Judicial Member सद�य लेखा लेखा चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 13th May, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S आदेश क� �ितिल�प 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 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →