What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the FAA should have provided an opportunity to the assessee to file a proper delay condonation petition before dismissing the appeals. The matter was restored to the FAA to decide the condonation petition after affording a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

The assessee's appeals before the First Appellate Authority (FAA) were dismissed in limine due to a 170-day delay in filing. The FAA did not condone the delay, stating insufficient cause without providing a separate opportunity for the assessee to file a condonation petition.

What were the issues?

Whether the First Appellate Authority erred in dismissing the appeals without affording an opportunity to the assessee to file a proper delay condonation petition.

Ambika Wood Industries Private… vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & MS PADMAVATHY S

Hearing: 15.05.2026Pronounced: 21.05.2026

आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against two orders of the Addl/JCIT(A), Faridabad, both dated 23.01.2026 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Years are 2021-22 & 2022-23.

- 2 - ITA Nos.1685 & 1686/CHNY/2026 Ambika Wood Industries Pvt. Ltd. 2. At the outset, we note that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) dismissed the appeals in limine without going into the merits, as the delay of 170 days in filing the appeals was not condoned. The FAA at para 3.3 of his orders had extracted the reason stated by the assessee in Form 35 for belated filing of appeals before him. However, the FAA held that there is no sufficient cause and dismissed the appeals without condoning the delay.

Aggrieved by the orders of the FAA, the assessee has filed the present appeals before the Tribunal. The Ld. AR submitted that, before dismissing the appeals in limine on account of delay in filing the appeals, assessee ought to have provided an opportunity to the assessee to file condonation application for the delay in filing the appeal before him, before dismissing the appeal in limine. The Ld. AR therefore prayed that, in the interest of justice, the assessee may be granted one more opportunity to file a proper delay condonation petition along with affidavit and necessary supporting documents before the First Appellate Authority.

The Ld.DR supported the orders of the FAA.

- 3 - ITA Nos.1685 & 1686/CHNY/2026 Ambika Wood Industries Pvt. Ltd. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The appeals filed by the assessee were dismissed in limine by the FAA on account of delay of 170 days in filing the appeals, without condoning the delay. On perusal of the orders of the FAA, it is observed that though the assessee had mentioned certain general reasons for the delay in Form No.35, no separate petition seeking condonation of delay supported by relevant evidence had been filed. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not filing a proper condonation petition before the FAA. At the same time, it is noticed that the FAA, without issuing any defect notice or affording an opportunity to the assessee to explain the reasons for the delay, proceeded to dismiss the appeals. The principles of natural justice require that an opportunity should be granted to the assessee to explain as to why the delay in filing the appeals should be condoned. In the present case, no such opportunity appears to have been provided by the FAA. Therefore, in the interest of justice and equity, we deem it fit to restore the matter to the file of the FAA. The assessee is directed to file a proper petition for condonation of delay, along with supporting materials and on receipt of the same, the FAA shall afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter adjudicate the condonation petition in

- 4 - ITA Nos.1685 & 1686/CHNY/2026 Ambika Wood Industries Pvt. Ltd. accordance with law. In the event the FAA is satisfied with the reasons furnished for the belated filing of the appeals, the FAA shall proceed to decide the appeals on merits in accordance with law. It is ordered accordingly.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21st May,2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (प�मावती एस) (जॉज� जॉज� के) (PADMAVATHY S) (GEORGE GEORGE K) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपा�य� /VICE PRESIDENT चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 21st May, 2026 RSR, Sr.PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Chennai 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF. By Order Digitally signed by REKHA REKHA SENTHIL RAJ SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.05.22 15:41:58 +05'30'

AMBIKA WOOD INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,KANCHEEPURAM vs. ITO TDS, TAMBARAM

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments