TENNARASSOU,PONDICHERRY vs. ACIT, PONDICHERRY CIRCLE,, PONDICHERRY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1265/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 May 2026AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the significant delay in filing the appeal due to the assessee's counsel's failure to represent the case. The Tribunal granted one more opportunity to the assessee for natural justice and remitted the appeal back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual and director of a company, declared an income of Rs. 7,46,620/- for AY 2012-13. During a survey, it was found that the assessee received cash from a property transaction by their elder brother. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment and added Rs. 53,27,600/- to the assessee's income.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal is justifiable and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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 30.07.2024 for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13.

2.

The assessee is an individual and one of the directors of M/s. Thulsi Living Spaces Ltd., Pondichery. The assessee filed a return of income for AY

ITA No.1265/Chny/2026 Tennarassou :- 2 -:

2012-13 on 31.03.2013 declaring a total income of Rs.7,46,620/-. During the survey conducted in the business premises of the assessee, the A.O noticed that assessee's elder brother A.Madhivanam had sold immovable property during the year under consideration and from the impounded documents it is noticed that the assessee has received certain cash towards the impugned transaction. The A.O reopened the assessment and since the assessee did not furnish any further details completed the assessment assessing the income Rs.53,27,600/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the A.O since the assessee did not respond to the various notices issued by the CIT(A). The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A).

3.

There is a delay of 520 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The assessee submitted that the C.A who was managing the proceedings before the income tax authorities failed to take any active steps to represent the case before the lower authorities. It is further stated that only on receipt of the notice of demand dated 14.08.2025 the assessee came to know that the first appellate authority has dismissed the appeal. The assessee therefore submitted that the delay is beyond the control of the assessee and is bonafide. Having heard both the parties and perused the material on record, we are of the view that there is a reasonable and sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore following the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST.Katiji & Ors., (167 ITR 471) (SC), we condone the delay in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

ITA No.1265/Chny/2026 Tennarassou :- 3 -:

4.

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 aware of the income tax proceedings and completely relied on his counsel for handling the tax matters. The Ld. AR further submitted that the counsel of the assessee did not provide proper professional support and therefore the assessee was not aware that the A.O has passed the assessment order. The ld. AR accordingly prayed for one more opportunity. Considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to assessee's case, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee in the interest of natural justice to represent the case properly by producing the required details. Accordingly, we remit the appeal back to the CIT(A) with a direction to call for necessary details and decide the issue in accordance with law. The assessee is required to submit the necessary details as may be called for and cooperate with appellate proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

5.

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) �याियक सद�य �याियक सद�य / Judicial Member लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य �याियक �याियक सद�य सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 13th May, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S

ITA No.1265/Chny/2026 Tennarassou :- 4 -:

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

EJTADA Digitally signed by EJTADA DURGA NARESH DURGA Date: 2026.06.01 NARESH 12:05:00 +05'30'

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →