SHRI VAARI ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP. CIRCLE-3(1), CHENNAI

ITA 2920/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 September 2026AY 2023-243 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 199 days in filing the appeal, finding that the assessee had made out a sufficient cause. Regarding the substantive issue, the Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had confirmed the AO's order due to the absence of submissions before the AO. The Tribunal, accepting the assessee's prayer and in the interest of justice, set aside the order of the CIT(A). The matter was remanded to the file of the AO. The assessee was granted liberty to file evidence in support of its claim. The grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes. The Tribunal did not decide on the merits of the addition made by the AO.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shri Vaari Electricals Private Ltd., filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai, against an order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2023-24. The appeal was filed with a delay of 199 days, which the Tribunal condoned upon finding sufficient cause. The assessee's representative pointed out that the CIT(A) confirmed the Assessing Officer's (AO) order due to no submissions being made before the AO. The assessee requested a remand to the AO. The revenue opposed this, stating the assessee did not avail opportunities. The AO had added an amount of Rs. 2,01,01,937/- under Section 37(1) for non-compliance.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal should condone the delay of 199 days in filing the appeal (mixed question of law and fact). 2. Whether the matter should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration (question of law). Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that the CIT(A) confirmed the AO's order because no submissions were made before the AO. The assessee prayed for the matter to be remanded to the AO's file. The assessee relied on the observation in the impugned order that no submissions were made before the CIT(A) in support of the grounds raised in Form-35. Revenue's contention: The revenue vehemently opposed the remand, submitting that the assessee did not avail the opportunities given by the CIT(A) and the AO. The revenue prayed for the dismissal of the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 37(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SHRI. INTURI RAMA RAO & BEFORE SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

Hearing: 09.09.2026

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.08.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2023-24. 2. We find this appeal was filed with a delay of 199 days. The assessee filed affidavit and petition to condone the said delay. Upon hearing both the parties and on perusal

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 37(1)

All 6,995 judgments and leading authorities on Section 37(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →