SREE BAKAVATI COPRA PRODUCTS,TIRUPUR vs. WARD I(4) / TIRUPUR, TIRUPUR

ITA 4459/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 October 2026AY 2019-205 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 759 days in filing the appeal before the FAA, considering the circumstances of the managing partner's death and the ensuing family disputes. The Tribunal reasoned that these events prevented the surviving partner from attending to statutory obligations, leading to the ex parte assessment. In the interest of justice and fair play, the assessee was granted one more opportunity to substantiate its case. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to cooperate fully and avoid unnecessary adjournments. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s. Sree Bakavati Copra Products, filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - NFAC, Delhi, for Assessment Year 2019-20. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) dismissed the appeal in limine due to a delay of 759 days, finding no reasonable cause for condonation. The assessee attributed the delay to the death of its managing partner on 24.05.2019, who handled statutory compliances. This led to the surviving partner's unawareness of assessment proceedings and subsequent family disputes hindering the compilation of records. The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment ex parte. The surviving partner became aware of the outstanding arrears upon receiving departmental communication and then sought to file the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 759 days in filing the appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA) is liable to be condoned, turning on the interpretation of 'sufficient cause' under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contention: The delay was primarily caused by the death of the managing partner, who was responsible for statutory compliances. This was followed by family disputes among surviving partners regarding the firm's management, making it difficult to compile records. The surviving partner was unaware of the assessment proceedings until receiving communication about tax arrears. The death certificate of the managing partner and the circumstances of family disputes were submitted as evidence. Revenue's Contention: The Ld. DR supported the order of the FAA, implying that the reasons cited by the assessee did not constitute sufficient cause for condoning the delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL

Hearing: 14.10.2026Pronounced: 16.10.2026

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 18.08.2026, passed under section 250 of

- 2 - ITA No.4459/CHNY/2026 Sree Bakavati Copra Products the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2019-20.

At the very outset, we notice that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without adjudicating on merits. The FAA held that there is a delay of 759 days in filing this appeal before him and there is no reasonable cause for condoning the same.

On perusal of the order of the FAA, we note that the assessee had sought condonation of the delay of 759 days in filing the appeal, stating that the assessee was unaware of the assessment proceedings and the assessment order being passed. It was submitted that the partner of the assessee firm had expired and his son, who is one of the surviving partner became aware of the assessment proceedings and the order being passed only upon receiving communication from the Department regarding outstanding arrears. Therefore, it was submitted that the reason for the delay was mainly due to the death of the managing partner and the ensuing family dispute. The FAA, however, rejected the request for condonation of delay, holding that the reasons cited did not constitute sufficient cause, and consequently dismissed the appeal in limine.

- 3 - ITA No.4459/CHNY/2026 Sree Bakavati Copra Products 4. The Ld. AR submitted that the delay of 759 days in filing the appeal was primarily attributable to the death of the managing partner on 24.05.2019, who was handling the day-to-day affairs and statutory compliances of the firm. The Ld.AR has also filed the copy of death certificate of the managing partner to substantiate his claim. Consequently, the surviving partner, being the son of the deceased managing partner, was unaware of the assessment proceedings and the order passed by the AO. It was further submitted that disputes arose among the families of the surviving partners regarding the management and continuation of the firm, making it difficult to compile the books of account and other records required for filing the return of income for AY 2019-20. As the return remained unfiled and there was no response to the notices issued, the AO completed the assessment ex parte. The surviving partner became aware of the assessment proceedings and the order only upon receiving communication from the Department regarding the outstanding tax arrears. Thereafter, he engaged professional assistance to compile the accounts and initiate remedial proceedings by filing an appeal before the FAA. The Ld. AR contended that the delay was occasioned by these circumstances and, accordingly, pleaded for condonation of the delay.

The Ld.DR supported the order of the FAA.

- 4 - ITA No.4459/CHNY/2026 Sree Bakavati Copra Products 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The Ld. AR submitted that the delay of 759 days in filing the appeal was primarily due to the death of the managing partner, who was looking after the day-to-day affairs and statutory compliances of the firm, followed by disputes among the partners’ families concerning the management and continuation of the firm. These circumstances allegedly prevented the surviving partner from attending to the statutory obligations of the firm, resulting in non-filing of the return of income and non-compliance with the notices issued by the AO. The surviving partner came to know of the assessment proceedings and the order passed by the AO only upon receipt of communication from the Department regarding the outstanding tax arrears. Considering the reasons advanced for the delay and in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it appropriate to condone the delay of 759 days in filing the appeal before the FAA. On merits, we notice that the assessment was completed ex-parte, as the assessee had neither filed the return of income nor responded to the notices issued by the AO. In view of the circumstances pleaded and in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it appropriate to provide the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its case by furnishing the relevant books of account and supporting documents. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the AO for fresh

- 5 - ITA No.4459/CHNY/2026 Sree Bakavati Copra Products adjudication in accordance with law, after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to extend full cooperation in the assessment proceedings and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. 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 16th October,2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज� जॉज� के) (गगन गोयल) (GEORGE GEORGE K) (GAGAN GOYAL) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER उपा�य� /VICE PRESIDENT चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated, the 16th October, 2026 RSR, Sr.PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त /CIT, Coimbatore 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF. By Order Digitally signed by REKHA REKHA SENTHIL RAJ SENTHIL RAJ Date: 2026.10.22 12:07:49 +05'30'

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →