BATHAVATCHALAM KARTHIKEYAN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-22(1), TAMBARAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1141/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 April 2026AY 2020-213 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after calling for necessary details. A cost of Rs. 5,000/- was levied on the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file an income tax return for AY 2020-21. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment and determined the income at Rs. 1,81,67,866/-. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a 146-day delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,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 PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short "CIT(A)") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") dated 22.12.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21.

2.

The assessee is an individual and is an employee of M/s. Stallion Media Pvt. Ltd. The assessee is also engaged in the business of buying auctioned automobiles and selling them for a commission. The assessee did not file the return of income for AY 2020-21. The A.O received information that the

ITA No.1141/Chny/2026 Bathavatchalam Karthikeyan :- 2 -:

assessee has received payments on which tax has been deducted at source and that the assessee has entered into certain other financial transactions. Since the assessee did not file the return of income, the A.O reopened the assessment by issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act. Since the assessee did not file any details, the A.O completed the assessment assessing the income at Rs.1,81,67,866/-. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). There is delay of 146 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A).

3.

We have heard the parties, and perused the material available on record. The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee submitted that the assessee is not well versed with income tax matters and completely dependent on the tax consultant who did not handle matter properly and hence the delay. The Ld. AR accordingly prayed that one more opportunity may be given. Considering the facts and circumstances peculiar to assessee's case, we are inclined to give one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the claim by producing the required details. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and remit the appeal back to the CIT(A) with the direction to call for necessary details and decide the issue in accordance with law. The assessee is required to submit the necessary details as may be called for and cooperate with appellate proceedings. It is ordered accordingly.

4.

Further, we also levy a cost of Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand only) in the appeal since considerable time and efforts have been spent by the Exchequer and for the reason that the assessee being delinquent before the lower

ITA No.1141/Chny/2026 Bathavatchalam Karthikeyan :- 3 -:

authorities. The same shall be paid by the assessee to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order and produce the receipt before the Ld. CIT(A).

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 22nd day of April, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज� जॉज� के) (पदमावती यस) (Padmavathy.S) (George George K) उपा�� / Vice President लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 22nd April, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S आदेश क� �ितिल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF Digitally signed by EJTADA DURGA EJTADA DURGA NARESH NARESH Date: 2026.05.05 16:48:07 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →