SUGUMARAN,CUMBUM, THENI vs. ITO, WARD-1, INCOME TAX OFFICE THENI, THENI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding sufficient cause for the delay due to the assessee's mother's illness. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for hearing on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty imposed under section 271D of the Act. The appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a delay of 125 days in filing.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was condonable due to sufficient cause. Whether the matter should be restored to the CIT(A) for hearing on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI & SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA
आदेश / O R D E R
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Ld.
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (NFAC) Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 19.11.2025 for Assessment Year 2018-19.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee instituted appeal before the ld.CIT(A) against the penalty imposed u/s271D of the Act. On further appeal to ld.CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine on account of delay of 125 days in filing appeal.
Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
Before the ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that due to prolonged illness and health condition of the mother of the Assassee, the appellant could not meet their representative in connection with the preparation of appeal. The ld.DR relied upon the order of the ld.CIT(A) and pleaded for the dismissal of the appeal.
Though we some extent concur with the submissions of Ld. DR Ms. Anitha, Addl. CIT, JCIT however, keeping in mind the reasons given, we are of the view that the reason given by the assessee is a sufficient cause for not filing the appeal in time before the CIT(A). Therefore, we condone the delay. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for hearing on merits. The Ld.CIT(A) whose shall proceed for hearing the appeal on merits after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
The assessee is directed to substantiate its case with all evidence and liberty to proceed with the appeal proceedings on merits as per law.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced on 26th day of November, 2025 at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 271D
- Sujatha Vaddanapu, Nalgonda vs ITO, Ward-1, NalgondaITA 2048/HYD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Inder Lal Ramrakhyani, Dhamtari vs ITO, DhamtariITA 694/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Harshit Singhania Buildcon, RaipurITA 560/RPR/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Shree Jalaram Finance, Borsad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(4), PetladITA 1785/AHD/2026[2000-01]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026AY 2000-01
- Veera Mani Kumari Vattikooti, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward -11(1), HyderabadITA 1218/HYD/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026