Loading judgment…
Facts
For AY 2017-18, the AO made an addition of Rs.8,42,627/- to business income, and the CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal due to a 134-day delay in filing. For AY 2019-20, the assessee appealed a penalty under Section 271AAC(1), which the CIT(A) also dismissed due to a 214-day delay. The quantum appeal for AY 2019-20 had already been set aside by the CIT(A) for fresh assessment.
Held
The Tribunal found sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal for AY 2017-18 and directed the CIT(A) to condone it and hear the appeal on merits. For AY 2019-20, considering the quantum appeal was set aside, the Tribunal also set aside and remanded the penalty appeal to the AO for reconsideration after the fresh assessment. Both appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing appeals based on delays in filing without condoning the delays for sufficient cause, and if penalty appeals should be remanded when the corresponding quantum assessment is set aside.
Sections Cited
271AAC(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA
आदेश / O R D E R
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:
These two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the different orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC)
Delhi [CIT(A)] both dated 14.08.2025 for Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2019- 20.
Brief facts for AY 2017-18 are that the AO made an addition of Rs.8,42,627/- on account of business income. On further appeal to ld.CIT(A), & 2552/Chny/25 & 2552/Chny/25 & 2552/Chny/25 ITA Nos. 2551 & 2552/Chny/25 S285 Venkatachalapathi PACB S285 Venkatachalapathi PACB S285 Venkatachalapathi PACB S285 Venkatachalapathi PACB he dismissed the appeal in limine as there was delay of 134 days in filing appeal (after excluding Covid-19 period) before the ld.CIT(A).
Now, assessee in appeal before this Tribunal.
3. We have gone through the reasons as noted by ld.CIT(A) in its order at para 2 and find the reasons convincing and sufficient cause, hence direct the ld.CIT(A) to condone the delay in filing appeal and hear the appeal on merits.
For AY 2019-20, brief facts of the case are that the assessee instituted appeal before the ld.CIT(A) against the penalty imposed u/s.271AAC(1)of the Act. However, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine on account of delay of 214 days in filing appeal.
Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
Before us, the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that quantum appeal for AY 2019-20 is already set aside by the ld.CIT(A) vide order dated 04.11.2025 [DIN & Order No.:ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1082300443(1)] to the file of AO for fresh assessment. Hence, in the light of quantum order we also set aside and remand this appeal for AY 2019-20 to the file of AO to take a view as per law after concluding the fresh assessment. Ld. DR did not controvert the order of ld.CIT(A) in quantum.
& 2552/Chny/25 & 2552/Chny/25 ITA Nos. 2551 & 2552/Chny/25 S285 Venkatachalapathi PACB S285 Venkatachalapathi PACB S285 Venkatachalapathi PACB S285 Venkatachalapathi PACB 4. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 08th day of December, 2025 at Chennai.