What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to the death of the assessee and the lack of knowledge of the legal heirs. The matter was restored to the FAA for a fresh adjudication to provide an opportunity for effective representation.

The assessee passed away during appellate proceedings, and his legal heirs were unaware of the pending proceedings. This led to the appeal being decided ex-parte by the First Appellate Authority (FAA).

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the FAA should be set aside and a fresh opportunity granted to the assessee due to the death of the assessee and lack of knowledge of legal heirs.

Late Mohit Kumar Saraogi, Rep. by… vs ITO | ITAT Chennai 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 17.06.2026Pronounced: 18.06.2026

आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 08.08.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2022-23.

ITA No.2355/CHNY/2026 - 2 - Late Mohit Kumar Saraogi 2. There is a delay of 175 days in filing the appeal. The legal heir of the assessee has filed an affidavit along with petition for condonation of delay stating therein the reasons for belated filing of appeal. It was stated that the assessee had passed away during the course of the appellate proceedings. After his demise, the family members/legal heirs were unaware of the pending income-tax proceedings and the order passed therein, as the deceased assessee was the sole person handling and managing his tax affairs. The Ld.AR further submitted that the legal heirs came to know of the impugned order and the consequential tax proceedings only at a later stage, whereupon immediate steps were taken to obtain the relevant records and prefer the present appeal. On perusal of the reasons stated, we are of the view that no latches can be attributed to the assessee as there is sufficient cause for belated filing of this appeal. Hence, we condone the delay and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits.

At the very outset, we notice that the order passed by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to three notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority.

The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee died during the course of appellate proceedings. The assessee had expired on 31.03.2025

ITA No.2355/CHNY/2026 - 3 - Late Mohit Kumar Saraogi wherein the first notice of hearing issued by the FAA was on 01.04.2025. The Ld.AR submits that the assessee is the sole person acquainted with and in charge of his income tax affairs. Upon death of the assessee, his family members were entirely unaware of the existence of any pending income tax appellate proceedings. Hence, the appellate proceedings remained ex-parte. Accordingly, the Ld. AR pleaded that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to effectively present his case before the FAA. The Ld.AR further undertook that he would duly appear before the Appellate Authority and furnish the necessary details as and when called for.

The Ld.DR was duly heard.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We note that the assessee expired on 31.03.2025, whereas the first notice of hearing was issued by the FAA on 01.04.2025. The learned AR has submitted that the deceased assessee was the sole person handling and managing his income-tax affairs and that, upon his demise, the family members/legal heirs were unaware of the pendency of the appellate proceedings before the FAA. Consequently, no effective representation could be made before the appellate authority, resulting in the appeal being disposed of ex parte. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and keeping in

ITA No.2355/CHNY/2026 - 4 - Late Mohit Kumar Saraogi view the principles of natural justice, we are of the view that one more opportunity deserves to be granted to the assessee for effective representation before the FAA. The Ld.AR has also undertaken to duly appear before the FAA and furnish the requisite details and evidences as and when called for. In light of the submissions of Ld.AR and in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that the matter ought to be restored to the files of the FAA. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the files of the FAA for fresh adjudication. The FAA shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 18th June,2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (एस.आर. रघुनाथा) (जॉज� जॉज� के) (GEORGE GEORGE K) (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) उपा�य� /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 18th June, 2026 RSR, Sr.PS

ITA No.2355/CHNY/2026 - 5 - Late Mohit Kumar Saraogi आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Coimbatore 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF. By Order Digitally signed by REKHA REKHA SENTHIL RAJ SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.06.22 12:31:10 +05'30'

LATE MOHIT KUMAR SARAOGI, REP. BY L/H SARAOGI RITU,TIRUPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), TIRUPPUR

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