SURAJ KANNAYE,NOIDA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 5(2)(1), NOIDA

PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

ITA No.934/Del/2026 SURAJ KANNAYE, NOIDA 1.1 The aggrieved assessee approached the CIT(A), where also he could not succeed on the ground that a delay of 826 days was not condoned u/s 249(3) of the Act. In this regard, we need to briefly consider the reasons given for the delay in filing of first appeal by the assessee. The assessee is claimed to be a South African national who had moved back to South Africa after his assignment ended in India in July, 2016. It is stated that due to the nature of work of the Appellant he was not vigilant enough in checking the e-filing portal where he could have obtained the assessment order against which the appeal needed to be filed. It is also stated that the assessee was not keeping track of his personal e-mail id after his Indian assignment ended. It is also stated that the notices issued by the Ld. AO ended up in the spam folder of the assessee. Thereafter, the Covid period followed and the consequent extension of limitation by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. It was the submission before the Ld. CIT(A) that in case the extended limitation period was considered then the actual delay was considerably less than the 826 days mentioned in the impugned order.

1.2 Needless to say, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the reasons given by the assessee were inadequate and thereafter the appeal was dismissed in limine.

1.3 Aggrieved with the action of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the present appeal with grounds challenging the non-condonation of delay and also on grounds of merit.

ITA No.934/Del/2026 SURAJ KANNAYE, NOIDA 2. Before us the Ld. AR read out extensively from the reasons for delay presented before the Ld. CIT(A) and stated that there was no ill intention in causing the delay because ultimately it was going to hurt the assessee more than anybody else. It was the submission that because of the international nature of the assignment of the assessee the due dates for filing appeal could not be strictly adhered too. It was the prayer that the delay may be condoned and the matter remanded back to the authorities below for adjudication.

2.1 The ld. DR had no objection in case the matter was to be remanded back.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20.05.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (SANJAY AWASTHI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 20.05.2026 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S.

ITA No.934/Del/2026 SURAJ KANNAYE, NOIDA Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Sr. No. Particulars Date 1 Date of dictation of Tribunal Order 14.05.2026 2 Date on which typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the 15.05.2026 Dictation Member 3 Date on which typed draft Tribunal Order is placed before the 20.05.2026 other Member (in the case of DB) 4 Date on which the approved draft Tribunal Order comes to the 20.05.2026 Sr. P.S. /P.S. 5 Date on which the fair Tribunal Order is placed before the 20.05.2026 Dictating Member for sign 6 Date on which the fair Order is placed before the other Member 20.05.2026 for sign (in the case of DB) 7 Date on which the signed order comes back to the Sr. P.S. /P.S 20.05.2026 for uploading on ITAT website 8 Date of uploading, if not, reason for not uploading 20.05.2026 9 Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 20.05.2026 10 Date on which order goes for xerox 11 Date on which the file goes for endorsement 12 Date on which the file goes to the Superintendent/O.S. for checking 13 Date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 14 Date on which the file goes to dispatch section for dispatch the Tribunal Order 15 Date of dispatch of order 16 Date on which file goes to Record Room after dispatch the order