Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC. The First Appellate Authority (FAA) dismissed the appeals in limine, holding a delay of 202 days in filing and no reasonable cause for condonation.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee's reason for delay (unawareness of penalty orders due to lack of real-time alerts on the ITBA portal) was reasonable. The Tribunal condoned the delay and directed the FAA to admit the appeals on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeals before the FAA can be condoned due to the assessee's unawareness of penalty orders.
Sections Cited
250 of the Income Tax Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO
आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against four different orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, all dated 04.12.2025 / 05.12.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act,
ITA Nos.4055 to 4057, 4059/Chny/2025 :- 2 -:
1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2015-16.
At the very outset, we notice that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) had dismissed the appeals of the assessee in limine without adjudicating on merits. The FAA held that there is a delay of 202 days in filing these appeals before him and there is no reasonable cause for condoning the same.
On perusing the orders of FAA, we noted that the assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay stating the reason that the assessee is unaware of the penalty orders being passed by the AO. The assessee, only upon receiving a call from the Income Tax office asking to pay the demand and penalty, become aware of the penalty orders being passed by the AO and immediately, took steps to file appeals, resulted in delay in filing of appeals before FAA. However, the FAA rejected the assessee’s request for condonation and dismissed the appeals of the assessee.
The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee has not received the penalty orders passed by the AO. The penalty orders have been uploaded in the ITBA portal and since there was ITA Nos.4055 to 4057, 4059/Chny/2025 :- 3 -:
no real time alert, assessee was unaware of the penalty orders passed by the AO. The Ld.AR submitted that only on receipt of phone call from the Income tax office asking to pay the demand, assessee become aware of the penalty orders and appeals have been filed before the FAA. The Ld.AR further submitted that as regards quantum appeal, it is pending adjudication before the FAA. Therefore, the Ld.AR submitted that the delay in filing the appeals before the FAA may be condoned.
The Ld.DR supported the orders of the FAA.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The FAA had dismissed the appeals of the assessee by rejecting the assessee’s request for condonation of delay of 202 days in filing the appeals. In our view, the reason cited by assessee in its petition before FAA seems quite reasonable and hence, we condone the delay before FAA and also direct him to admit the issue on merits. Therefore, we set aside the orders of FAA and remit the matter back to his file for adjudicating the issue on merits. It is ordered accordingly.
ITA Nos.4055 to 4057, 4059/Chny/2025 :- 4 -:
In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 17th February, 2026 at Chennai.