NIRMALA,KANCHEEPURAM vs. ITO, WARD-1,, KANCHEEPURAM
Facts
The assessee, an individual, did not file a return of income. The Assessing Officer (AO) received information about substantial bank deposits during demonetisation and made an addition of Rs. 5,68,047 under section 69A of the Act. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a delay of 254 days.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 34 days in filing the appeal before it, considering the assessee's submission that she is a homemaker with limited technical knowledge and was dependent on counsel. Since the lower authorities had not examined the issue on merits, the appeal was remitted back to the AO for fresh consideration.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) is condonable and whether the additions made by the AO are justified on merits.
Sections Cited
250, 142(1), 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & MS. PADMAVATHY.S
आदेश / O R D E R
PER PADMAVATHY.S, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (in short "CIT(A)") passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") dated 15.08.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18.
The assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income. The assessing officer (AO) received information that the assessee has made substantial bank deposits during the demonetisation period. Since the assessee
ITA No.3740/Chny/2025 Nirmala
:- 2 -:
did not file the return of income, the AO issued notice under section 142(1) requiring the assessee to prepare a true and correct return of income. The assessee did not furnish any further details the assessing officer concluded the assessment by making an addition of Rs.5,68,047/- under section 69A of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee filed further appeal before the CIT(A). There was a delay of 254 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine. The assessee is in appeal before the tribunal against the order of the CIT(A).
There is delay of the 34 days in filing the appeal before the tribunal and the assessee filed the petition seeking condonation of delay. Having heard both the parties and perused the material on record, we are of the view that there is a reasonable and sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore following the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST.Katiji & Ors., (167 ITR 471) (SC) we condone the delay of in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication.
We heard the parties and perused the material on record. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is a homemaker and is doing a small business of embroidery and sari making. The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee does not have any technical knowledge to access computers and the assessee therefore is completely dependent on counsel with regard to income tax matters who did not handle assessee's case properly. Accordingly, the Ld. AR submitted that there is a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). Considering the facts and circumstances unique to the assessee's case, we are of the considered view that there is a reasonable cause
ITA No.3740/Chny/2025 Nirmala
:- 3 -:
for the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and therefore, condone the same. Since the lower authorities have not examined the impugned issue on merits, we remit the appeal back to the AO for fresh consideration by calling for necessary details as may be required in order to decide the case in accordance with law. The assessee is directed to file relevant documents in support of the impugned additions made by the AO and cooperate with assessment proceedings without seeking unnecessary adjournments. It is ordered accordingly.
Further, we also levy a cost of Rs.2,000/- (Two Thousand only) in the appeal since considerable time and efforts have been spent by the Exchequer and for the reason that the assessee being delinquent before the lower authorities. 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 AO.
In result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 27th day of February, 2026 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (एबी टी. वक�) (पदमावती यस) (ABY. T. Varkey) (Padmavathy.S) �याियक �याियक सद�य �याियक �याियक सद�य सद�य / Judicial Member सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य /Accountant Member सद�य चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 27th February, 2026. EDN, Sr. P.S
ITA No.3740/Chny/2025 Nirmala
:- 4 -:
आदेश क� �ितिल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड� फाईल/GF
