THOBIAS JUSTUS,KANYAKUMARI vs. ITO, WARD-1,, NAGERCOIL

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

The captioned online appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, [CIT(A)] dated 24.12.2025 for Assessment Year 2017- 18. 2. The assessee is an individual engaged in the business of purchase and selling fish. For the relevant AY 2017-18, the assessee could not file any return of income under section 139. On information that

ITA No 619/Chny/2026 (AY 2017-18) Thobias Justus Vs ITO W-1 :: 2 :: assessee made cash withdrawals from his bank account at Rs.91,69,318/- and show cause notice under section 148A (b) dated 07.03.2024 was issued to file reply within 10 days but no response received. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.2,98,74,117/- u/s 69A towards unexplained money without examining the assessment records of earlier years and subsequent years to determine the actual income and the same is contested in 3. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who vide its order dated 24.12.2025 dismissed the appeal of the assessee in liminie on account delay of 190 days in filing the appeal. 4. Being aggrieved with the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before this Tribunal. 5. The Ld.AR for the assessee stated the Ld.CIT(A) passed order in limine on account of delay in filing appeal. He submitted that assessee being an illiterate individual engaged in the business of purchase and sale of fish, does not operate monitor and having no email account. Therefore, he was unaware of the issuance of the assessment order dated 17.01.2025. It was only upon receipt of a recovery notice dated 15.07.2025 that the assessee came to know about the said order and immediate took steps to approach a tax consultant to take necessary actions. 6. The ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of substantial justice, we are of the considered opinion that the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) deserves to be condoned. It is a settled principle of law that substantial justice

ITA No 619/Chny/2026 (AY 2017-18) Thobias Justus Vs ITO W-1 :: 3 :: should prevail over technical considerations and an assessee should not be denied opportunity of hearing merely on account of procedural delay, particularly when the additions involve substantial tax liability. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 190 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A). The matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merits, in accordance with law, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to promptly comply with the notices and file necessary details/documents without seeking unnecessary adjournments. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on the 01st day of June 2026, in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (इंतूरी रामा राव) (मनु कुमार िग�र) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) लेखा सद*य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद*य/JUDICIAL MEMBER

चे�नई/Chennai, +दनांक/Dated: 01st June, 2026 SNDP, Sr. PS

आदेश क! ��त,ल-प अ.े-षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF