KINGSIGNAL TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CORP.CIRCLE - 4(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITTPA 18/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 March 2026AY 2021-222 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the assessee was not maintainable before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The reasoning was that the impugned order passed by the Assessing Officer – NFAC was not appealable before the ITAT and ought to have been challenged before the appropriate forum. Consequently, without going into the merits of the application for condonation of delay, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal as not maintainable. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Kingsignal Technologies (India) Private Limited, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai, against an order passed by the Assessing Officer – NFAC dated 16.12.2023. This order was passed under Section 143(3) read with Sections 144C(3) and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2021-22. The appeal was filed with a delay of 504 days. The ITAT noted that the order under challenge was not appealable before the Tribunal and should have been filed before the appropriate forum.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the assessee is maintainable before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, considering the nature of the order passed by the Assessing Officer – NFAC under Section 143(3) read with Sections 144C(3) and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contention: The assessee filed the appeal before the ITAT, implicitly arguing for its maintainability. The specific arguments regarding the maintainability are not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contention: The revenue did not file any specific contention regarding the maintainability of the appeal in the provided text. However, the Assessing Officer's order was the subject of the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144C(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA

Hearing: 23.03.2026

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM: This present appeal has been filed against the order passed by the Assessing Officer – NFAC dated 16.12.2023 under Section 143(3) read with Sections 144C(3) and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2021-22.

2.

At the outset, it is noted by the Registry that there is a delay of 504 days in filing the present appeal.

IT (TP)A 18/Chny/2025 (AY 2021-22) Kingsignal Technologies (India) Pvt Ltd VS DCIT, CC 4(1) :: - 2 - :: 3. However, upon consideration, it is observed that the impugned order passed by the Assessing Officer is not appealable before this Tribunal and ought to have been challenged before the appropriate forum.

4.

Accordingly, without going into the merits of the application for condonation of delay, the present appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed as not maintainable.

Order pronounced in open court 23rd day of March, 2026 in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (मनु कुमार िग�र) (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R.RAGHUNATHA) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) लेखा सद*य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद*य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, +दनांक/Dated: 23rd March, 2026 SNDP, Sr. PS आदेश क ��त,ल-प अ.े-षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF

Page - 2 - of 2

More judgments on Section 144C(3)

All 595 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144C(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →