SRI VISAKA PRECISION PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1) CHE, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4272/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 October 2026AY 2020-20213 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 99 days in filing the appeal, finding the reasons provided by the assessee to be bona fide. Regarding the substantive issue, the Tribunal noted that the assessee was not afforded an opportunity to present its case before the Ld. CIT(A) during the first appellate proceedings. The assessee undertook to represent its case before the Ld. CIT(A) without fail. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The assessee was granted liberty to file evidence in support of its claim. The Tribunal directed that if the assessee fails to represent its case, the Ld. CIT(A) may pass an order based on available material. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) was set aside, and the grounds raised by the assessee were allowed for statistical purposes. No specific issue was left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sri Visaka Precision Products Private Limited, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chennai, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi, for Assessment Year 2020-21. The appeal was filed with a delay of 99 days, which the Tribunal condoned after finding the reasons to be bona fide. The Assessing Officer (AO) had completed the assessment under Section 143(3) and made an addition on account of exempt income under Section 10(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, being profit from a partnership firm. This addition was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex parte of the assessee.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 99 days in filing the appeal before the ITAT should be condoned? (Question of fact). The assessee argued that the delay was due to bona fide reasons that prevented timely filing. The revenue reported no objection to the condonation. 2. Whether the matter should be remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration, given that the assessee was not afforded an opportunity to pursue its case in the first appellate proceedings? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under the Income-tax Act, 1961). The assessee prayed for one more opportunity and requested a remand to the Ld. CIT(A). The revenue reported no objection.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 10(2A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. P. Uttamchand Jain, C.A
Hearing: 13.10.2026Pronounced: 27.10.2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ �ायपीठ, चे�ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI �ी एस.एस. िव�ने� रिव, �ाियक सद� एवं �ी एस.आर. रगुनाथॎ, लेखा सद� के सम� Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri S.R. Raghunatha, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4272/Chny/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Sri Visaka Precision Products Private Vs. The ACIT, Limited, Corporate Circle-3(1), 96, AB Block (Chennai), Chennai, Chennai. Anna Nagar S.O, Chennai, 600040. [PAN: AAHCSO207R] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Mr. P. Uttamchand Jain, C.A. ��थ� की ओर से/ Respondent by : Ms. Anshu Sharawat, Addl.CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 13.10.2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 27.10.2026 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 06.02.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21.

2.

We find that this appeal was filed with a delay of 99 days. The assessee filed an affidavit accompanied by a petition explaining the reasons. On perusal of the same and upon hearing both the parties, we find that the reasons explained by the assessee are bona fide, which really prevented the assessee from filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay of 99 days is condoned.

2 I.T.A. No.4272 /Chny/2026

3.

At the outset, it is noted that the AO completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act), inter alia, making an addition on account of exempt income under Section 10(2A) of the Act, being profit from a partnership firm. The said addition was challenged before the Ld. CIT(A), who confirmed the order of the AO ex parte of the assessee.

4.

The Ld. AR, Mr. P. Uttamchand Jain, CA, prayed for one more opportunity and requested that the matter be remanded to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

5.

The Ld. DR, Ms. Anshu Sharawat, Addl. CIT, reported no objection.

6.

Upon hearing both the parties, we note that, during the first appellate proceedings, the assessee was not afforded an opportunity to pursue its case before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR undertakes that the assessee shall represent its case before the Ld. CIT(A) without fail.

7.

Considering the same, in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The assessee is at liberty to file evidence, if any, in support of its claim. The assessee shall represent its case before the Ld. CIT(A) without fail. In case the assessee fails to do so, the Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass an order in accordance with law, on the basis of the material available on record. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside, and the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

3 I.T.A. No.4272 /Chny/2026

Order pronounced on 27th October, 2026 at Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 27.10.2026 MM/- आदेश की �ितिलिप 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 MANISH by MANISH MISHRA MISHRA Date: 2026.10.30 17:47:19 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 10(2A)

All 173 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(2A) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →