SUBRAMANIYARAJA VISHNU SANKAR,THENI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, THENI, THENI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal determined that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without condoning the delay and adjudicating the case on merits. It remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) with a direction to condone the delay and decide the appeal on its merits, subject to the assessee paying costs of Rs. 5,000/- to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an individual, filed an income tax return claiming agricultural income. The Assessing Officer made a substantial addition to the income due to the assessee's failure to provide evidence for holding agricultural land. The assessee appealed the assessment order to the CIT(A) with a delay of 371 days, citing residence in a remote area and lack of legal knowledge, but the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine due to a 371-day delay, and if the delay should be condoned to allow for an adjudication on the merits of the assessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI JAGADISH
आदेश / O R D E R
PER JAGADISH, A.M : Aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21 arises out of the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] dated 14.06.2024 in the matter of assessment framed by the Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act,1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) on 28.09.2021.
The only ground of appeal in this appeal of assessee is against dismissing the appeal in limine without condoning the delay of 371 days in filling the appeal by the Ld. CIT(A).
1. 3. The assessee is an individual and filed his return of income showing total income of Rs. 45,250/- on 30.03.2021. The assessee has claimed large agriculture income and therefore, the case was taken up for scrutiny. The A.O in the assessment order, made addition of gross agriculture income of Rs.3,39,39,617/- as the assessee did not furnish evidence regarding holding of agriculture land and other evidences. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 371 days. The assessee has given the reason that he was residing in a remote area and was not well versed in legal matters. The assessee further submitted that he came to know about the assessment order only when he has received a call regarding the outstanding demand. The Ld. CIT(A) did not accept the reason and dismissed the appeal .
The Ld. Authorized Representative (A.R.) of the assessee has submitted that Ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without deciding the appeal on merit. The Ld AR submitted that that there was sufficient reason for the delay in filing the appeal and therefore prayed that Ld. CIT(A) may be directed to admit the appeal and decide the issue on merit, in the interest of justice .
On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative, vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival submissions, and perused the materials available on record. There was a delay of 371 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee has provided the reason for the delay, in filling appeal, but the Ld. CIT(A) did not accept the explanation and dismissed the appeal in limine. We have given considerable thought to the matter and are of the opinion that the Ld. CIT(A) should have condoned the delay and decided the case on merits in the interest of justice . We, therefore remand the matter back to file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal on merits subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/-. The same shall be paid by the assessee to Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order and produce the receipt before the Ld. CIT(A). In the view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 07th February, 2025.
More judgments on Section 144B
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Devkinandan Traders vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Dixit Medical Agencies vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Sukant Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA And 6 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026