VIJAYAKUMAR K VALAYATHODIYIL,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, NCC-22(1), TAMBARAM

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ‘बी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

श्री जॉजज जॉजज के, उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री अमिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.403/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2012-13
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.404/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2013-14
आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.405/Chny/2025, Assessment Years: 2014-15

[
Vijayakumar K Valayathodiyil
No.A-302, Purva Swan Lake,
Renugambal Nagar, OMR,
Kelambakkam,
Chennai-603 103. [PAN: ADKPV1734B]

Assistant
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Non-Corporate Circle-22(1),(TBM),
Chennai.

(अपीलार्थी/Appellant)

(प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)
अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by :
Shri D.Anand, Advocate
प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by :
Shri M.Rajan, CIT

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing
:
22.04.2025
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement
:
25.04.2025

आदेश / O R D E R

PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :

The below mentioned appeals have been filed by the appellant assessee for AY-2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 contesting the order of Ld. First Appellate Authority indicated in Column-E, herein below:-
S.
No.
Appeal Nos.
AYs
Appellant
CIT(A) Order Details
Respondent
A B
C
D
E
F
2012-13
Vijayakumar
K
Valayathodiyil
No.A-302, Purva
Swan Lake,
Renugambal
Nagar, OMR,
Kelambakkam,
Chennai-603
103. [PAN:
ADKPV1734B]

DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S /
250 / 2024-25 / 1071140158(1) dated 12.12.2024. Assistant
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Non-Corporate
Circle-
22(1),(TBM),
Chennai.
2013-14
DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S /
250 / 2024-25 / 1071140967(1) dated 12.12.2024. 2014-15
DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S /
250 / 2024-25 / 1071139922(1) dated 12.12.2024. ITA Nos. 403, 404 & 405/Chny/2025

Page - 2 - of 4

All the above appeals are centering around a common issue and hence for the purposes of convenience were heard and are being adjudicated together.
2.0
At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there was a delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), as per following details, which was not condoned by him holding insufficiency of cause:-
ITA Nos
Assessment Year
Delay
ITA No. 403 / Chny / 2025

2012-13
716 days
ITA No. 404 / Chny / 2025

2013-14
192 days
ITA No. 405 / Chny / 2025

2014-15
188 days
Before the ld.CIT(A) the assessee had justifying the delay submitted that the assessee is a small time business man in the business of Hotel and canteen. On account of severe losses in the business he had to travel regularly, back and forth, to his native place in Kerala. Thus the notices issued by the Revenue were not received and could not be timely complied. It was also submitted that part of the delay was attributable to Covid-19. Similar reasons were also forwarded for non-compliance before the Ld.AO. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the Ld. First
Appellate Authority however chose to not condone the delay and proceeded to dismiss the appeal. The Ld.CIT(A) concluded that the ITA Nos. 403, 404 & 405/Chny/2025

Page - 3 - of 4

department has robust electronic governance system and hence the indicated delays cannot take place. The Ld. CIT(A) thus dismissed the assessee’s appeal.
3.0
The Id.DR would like to rely upon the order of the authorities below.
4.0
We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. We have noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has merely dismissed the assessee’s appeal by placing emphasis upon the unjustified delay only.
He has not given any observation qua merits of the addition. On the issue of delay we find sufficient force in the assessee’s argument contributing to impugned delay. The Covid-19 pandemic also was in force though in part, out of the overall delay. We are conscious of the fact that no litigant gains by intentionally delaying its own matters and by making technical / procedural mistakes. Nonetheless, the assessee on its own part cannot absolve himself of delaying its filing and not complying with procedural requirements contributing to waste of precious time of appellate authorities. The Ld. DR argued that the assessee is habitual defaulter and costs be imposed in case the matter is to be sent back to lower authorities for readjudication. Be that as it may be, we are of the view that ends of justice would be met if the assessee is given one last opportunity to present its case before the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly we set aside the order of lower authorities and direct the Ld.CIT(A) to readjudicate the ITA Nos. 403, 404 & 405/Chny/2025

Page - 4 - of 4

matter after considering condonation of the delay in filing the appeal before him. The Ld.First Appellate Authority shall give due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass a speaking order on merits. If required, he may obtain a remand report from the Ld.AO. The assessee shall comply with all the statutory notices of the lower authorities and any deviation shall be adversely viewed. Accordingly all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee vide ITA No.403 to 405 are allowed for statistical purposes.
5.0
In the result, the appeals of the assessee are decided as under:-
ITA Nos
Assessment Year
Result
ITA No. 403 / Chny / 2025

2012-13
Allowed for statistical purposes
ITA No. 404 / Chny / 2025

2013-14
Allowed for statistical purposes
ITA No. 405 / Chny / 2025

2014-15
Allowed for statistical purposes
Order pronounced on 25th , April -2025at Chennai. (जॉजज जॉजज के)
(GEORGE GEORGE K)
उपाध्यक्ष / vice president (अधिताभ शुक्ला)
(AMITABH SHUKLA)
लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member
चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 25th , April -2025. KB/-
आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to:
1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant
2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent
3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Chennai
4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR
5. गार्ड फाईि/GF