PREETHI,KANCHIPURAM vs. ITO, WARD-15(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1702/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 June 2026AY 2018-193 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) due to reasonable cause and allowed the appeal for statistical purposes. The case was remitted back to the AO for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file an income tax return for AY 2018-19. The AO reopened the assessment and treated bank credits of Rs. 2,53,42,323/- as unexplained. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal due to a delay of 709 days.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable and whether the appeal should be heard on merits.

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, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND MS. PADMAVATHY.S

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 28..01.2026 for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19.

2.

The assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income for the AY 2018-19. The A.O received information that the assessee is having

ITA No.1702/Chny/2026 Preethi :- 2 -:

substantial financial transactions in her bank account. Since the assessee did not file the return of income, the A.O reopened the assessment by issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The assessee neither filed the return of income nor responded any of the notices issued and therefore, the A.O completed the assessment by treating the entire credits in the bank account of the assessee as unexplained amounting to Rs. 2,53,42,323/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). There was a delay of 709 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and 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's father who was taking care of the tax related matters of the assessee was suffering from prolonged illness and hospitalization. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee's father passed away and due to his sudden death, the assessee deeply distressed and emotionally disturbed. The Ld. AR also submitted that due to family obligations and pregnancy related health issues, the assessee could not concentrate on the income tax matters and therefore did not represent the case properly before the lower authorities. The Ld. AR accordingly prayed that one more opportunity may be given. From the perusal of the order of the CIT(A), we notice that the assessee has filed a petition for condoning the delay mentioning the reasons as stated by the Ld. AR hereinabove. In this regard, we notice that the CIT(A) while not condoning the delay has recorded some personal comments with regard to the assessee's physical and mental state of affairs which in our opinion is not in good taste and could have been avoided. Considering the facts and

ITA No.1702/Chny/2026 Preethi :- 3 -:

circumstances peculiar to assessee's case and in the interest of natural justice, we are convinced that there a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and therefore 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 AO 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 assessment proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

4.

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

Order pronounced on 01st day of June, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज� जॉज� के) (पदमावती यस) (Padmavathy.S) (George George K) उपा�� / Vice President लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member लेखा लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 01st June, 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 EJTADA Digitally signed by EJTADA DURGA NARESH DURGA Date: 2026.06.04 NARESH 17:06:53 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 148

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →