PLAZA PROPERTIES LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ITO, COPORATE WARD-5(2), CHENNAI
आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘सी’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ के, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी इंटूरȣ रामा राव, लेखा सदèय के सम¢
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.: 2933 & 2934/CHNY/2025
िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15
Plaza Properties Limited,
New No.5, Old No.3,
Plaza House,
Thirumurthi Street,
T.Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. PAN: AAACP 4408Q
Vs.
The Income Tax Officer,
Corporate Ward 5(2),
Chennai.
(अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant)
(ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent)
अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Ms. Varshha Sridhar, Advocate
For Shri Y. Sridhar, CA
ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. R. Anitha, Addl.CIT
सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16.12.2025
घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 16.12.2025
आदेश/ O R D E R
PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT:
These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against two orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National
Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 01.09.2025 &
29.08.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
(hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Years are 2013-14 & 2014-15. ITA No.2933 & 2934/Chny/2025
:- 2 -:
2. At the very outset, we notice that First Appellate Authority
(FAA) had dismissed the appeals of the assessee in limine without adjudicating on merits. The FAA held that there is inordinate delay of 3839 days in filing both the appeals before him and the assessee has not submitted the reasons for delay. In Form 35, assessee has not given any specific reasons for delay in filing the appeals before FAA. The FAA had issued various notices to the assessee to submit proper reason for the inordinate delay in filing the appeals.
But the assessee has filed adjournment applications and hence, the FAA had dismissed the appeals in limine without condoning the delay in filing the appeals.
The Ld.AR submitted that assessee was not in receipt of intimation u/s.200A of the Act levying late fees u/s.234E of the Act. It was stated that assessee became aware of the intimation issued u/s.200A of the Act belatedly and immediately on the knowledge of intimation u/s.200A of the Act, appeals were filed before FAA belatedly.
The ld.DR was duly heard.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The appeals filed by the assessee have been dismissed by ITA No.2933 & 2934/Chny/2025
:- 3 -:
the FAA in limine without condoning the delay of 3839 days.
Admittedly, the assessee had not filed the condonation petition, though the FAA had issued notices. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices issued by the FAA. However, in the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that the matter needs to be restored back to the files of the FAA. Accordingly, we restore the matter to the files of the FAA. The assessee is directed to file a proper condonation application with specific reasons for delay in filing the appeals before the FAA. If the FAA is satisfied with the reasons given for condonation of delay, he shall consider the issue on merits. The FAA shall afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee before a decision is taken in the matter. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 16th December, 2025 at Chennai. (इंटूरȣ रामाराव)
(INTURI RAMA RAO)
लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
(जॉज[ जॉज[ के)
(GEORGE GEORGE K)
उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT
चे᳖ई/Chennai,
ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 16th December, 2025
ITA No.2933 & 2934/Chny/2025
:- 4 -:
RSR
आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant
Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Chennai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR
गाड[ फाईल/GF.