RAYMOL CHANDRATHIL BABU,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO, NON CORPORATE WARD,-1 (4), KOCHI
Facts
The Assessing Officer passed an assessment order under Section 143(3). The assessee's appeal to the Ld. CIT(A) against this order was dismissed in limine due to a delay of 139 days in filing.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, set aside the Ld. CIT(A)'s order, and restored the matter to the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh hearing on merits. The assessee was directed to submit all necessary evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) should be condoned and whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine without hearing on merits.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH - DB
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH - DB
BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM
ITA No. 799/Coch/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Raymol Chandrathil Babu, .......... Appellant Chandrathil House, Palarivattom, Ernakulam, Kerala- 682 025. vs. [PAN: AGIPB1201A]
Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate .......... Respondent Ward-1(4), Kochi.
Assessee by: Shri Rajeev Pai, C.A Revenue by: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr AR
Date of Hearing: 07.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 25.11.2025 O R D E R PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM: The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/NFAC, Delhi [‘CIT(A)’ in short] dated 23.07.2025 for Assessment Year 2015-16.
The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (A.O.) passed order u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 27.12.2017, assessing the total income at Rs.1,52,07,190/-.
Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before
the Ld. CIT(A). However, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine as the appeal has been filed late by 139 days.
Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us.
Before us, the Ld. AR for assessee read out para 4 of the
impugned order wherein reasons for delay are recorded. The Ld. D.R
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,
however, keeping in mind the natural justice, we are of the view that the
assessee may be granted opportunity to file submissions and evidence,
if any before the ld.CIT(A). We are of the considered view that the
reasons given for delay in filing cannot be ruled out. It is one of
possibility, hence we condone the delay. Accordingly, the impugned
order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the appeal file to the
Ld. CIT(A) for hearing on merits. The Ld.CIT(A) 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 documents, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which
Ld.CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the appeal proceedings on
merits as per law. The Ld. AR of the assessee also assured us that the
assessee will prosecute the case diligently before the Ld. CIT(A).
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25th November-2025 at Cochin.
Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cochin, Dated: 25th November, 2025 K.B Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The Pr. CIT concerned 4. The Sr. DR, ITAT, Cochin 5. Guard File
