KRISHNAN RAVICHANDRAN,CHENGALPATTU vs. ACIT, NON CORPORATE CIRCLE-22(1), CHENNAI

ITA 1134/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 April 2026AY 2018-193 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, while deprecating the assessee's nonchalant attitude, decided to grant one more opportunity in the interest of justice. The matter was restored to the file of the CIT(A) for a proper delay condonation petition with supporting evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 409 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay, as the assessee had not provided an affidavit or documentary evidence to support the reasons for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the First Appellate Authority was justified in dismissing the appeal without condoning the delay, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present a proper delay condonation petition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE KAND MS PADMAVATHY S

Hearing: 21.04.2026Pronounced: 22.04.2026

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 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 12.12.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2018-19.

At the outset, we note that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) dismissed the appeal in limine without going into the merits, as the

:- 2 -: ITA No.1134/Chny/2026 delay of 409 days in filing the appeal was not condoned. The FAA, in the impugned order has recorded the reasons stated by the assessee in Form 35 for the delay. However, since the assessee had not filed any affidavit in support of the reasons nor furnished any documentary evidence, the FAA rejected the explanation and dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay.

Aggrieved by the order of the FAA, the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld. AR submitted that, as stated in Form 35, the delay occurred because the assessee was facing medical issues during the period, due to which the assessee could not file the appeal in time. However, the FAA dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay on the ground that the assessee had not filed any affidavit or supporting documentary evidence to substantiate the claim. 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 before the First Appellate Authority.

The Ld.DR supported the order of the FAA.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. On going through the order of the FAA, it is seen that though the assessee had stated reasons for the delay in Form 35 however, no separate petition for condonation of delay along with affidavit and

:- 3 -: ITA No.1134/Chny/2026 supporting evidence was filed. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not filing the delay condonation application before the FAA. However, in the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that the assessee should be given one more opportunity to explain the delay. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the FAA. The assessee is directed to file a proper delay condonation petition, along with affidavit and necessary documentary evidence, explaining the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal. The FAA shall consider the same and pass order in accordance with law. 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 22nd April, 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 22nd April, 2026 RSR आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Chennai By Order 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR Digitally signed by REKHA REKHA SENTHIL RAJ 5. गाड� फाईल/GF. SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.04.28 10:22:27 +05'30'

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →