DURAISAMY NANDITA ISWARYA,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), TIRUPPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 803/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 April 2026AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal condoned the delay and, considering the assessee's submission of having a fair chance of success, remanded the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The assessee was directed to appear before the CIT(A) and submit evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 104 days, which was condoned. The assessee failed to file a return of income within the due dates and also did not comply with notices from the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the matter should be remanded to the lower appellate authority for fresh consideration due to non-compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 148,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 54F

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

Hearing: 15.04.2026Pronounced: 29.04.2026

आदेश/O R D E R

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.08.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [ld.CIT(A)’ in short] for Assessment Year 2015-16.

2.

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 104 days. The assessee filed an affidavit explaining the reasons to condone the said

2 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.803/Chny/2026 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.803/Chny/2026 No.803/Chny/2026 No.803/Chny/2026

delay. On perusal of the same particularly at Para 4 & 5 and upon

hearing both the parties, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are

bonafide which prevented the assessee in filing the appeal in time. Thus,

delay of 104 days condoned.

3.

At the outset, it is noted that the assessee is an individual, no return

of income was filed within the due dates provided u/s. 139(1) of the

Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ in short]. The Assessing Officer [‘AO’ in

short] on an information of sale of immovable property issued notice u/s.

148 of the Act requiring the assessee to furnish the return of income

within 30 days. According to the AO, no return of income filed in

response to 148 notice, but however, filed return of income on 26.03.2021.

The AO considering the explanation, made disallowance on account of

expenses made towards transfer of property and denial of deduction u/s.

54F of the Act vide his order dated 25.09.2021 u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the

Act. The assessee did not accept the said assessment order and filed an

appeal before the ld.CIT(A), wherein no compliance was made by the

assessee in response to the notices issued by the ld.CIT(A) in the first

appellate proceedings, which is evident from Para 4 of the impugned

order.

3 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.803/Chny/2026 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.803/Chny/2026 No.803/Chny/2026 No.803/Chny/2026

4.

The ld.AR, Ms. Vardini Karthik, Advocate, submits that the assessee

has a fair chance of succeeding before the ld.CIT(A) as the assessee is

ready to furnish all evidences in support of her claim. She prayed to

remand the matter to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for a fresh consideration.

5.

The ld.DR, Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl.CIT, reported no

objection.

6.

Considering the submissions of the ld.AR and ld.DR and the facts

and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice as discussed

above, there was no response/compliance by the assessee before the

ld.CIT(A) and considering the submissions, the assessee has a fair

chance of succeeding before ld. CIT(A) and we deem it proper to remand

the matter to the file of the ld.CIT(A). Assessee shall appear before the

ld.CIT(A) without fail and is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of

her claim. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for

statistical purposes.

4 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.803/Chny/2026 I.T.A. I.T.A. No.803/Chny/2026 No.803/Chny/2026 No.803/Chny/2026

7.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 29th April, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated 29.04.2026 JPV/- आदेशकी'ितिलिपअ.ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ&/Appellant, 2.'(थ&/ Respondent, 3. आयकरआयु//CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय'ितिनिध/DR & 5. गाड$ फाईल/GF.

PRASANNA Digitally signed by PRASANNA VANI JETTY VANI JETTY Date: 2026.05.04 10:44:36 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →