CHINNASAMY GURUSAMY,COIMBATORE vs. ITO, NCW-4(4), COIMBATORE

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 14.10.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2014-15.

At the very outset, we notice that the First Appellate Authority (FAA) had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without adjudicating on merits. The FAA held that there is a delay of 32 days in filing this appeal before him and there is no reasonable cause for condoning the same.

On perusing the order of FAA, we noted that the assessee has filed petition for condonation of delay stating the reason that the authorized representative of the assessee handed over the assessment order to the assessee stating that he could not handle the case and later the assessee appointed new consultant, who later on filed the appeal. Since the assessee was unaware of the date of receipt of assessment order, the date of assessment order itself has been taken as the date of receipt and hence, there is a delay of 31 days. However, the FAA rejected the assessee’s request for condonation and dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the assessee is educated only up to school final and is working as a lathe worker. The assessee is unaware of the income-tax e-proceedings and has relied on his authorized representative for filing of appeal. The authorized representative after receiving the assessment order handed over the files to the assessee stating that he cannot handle the case since huge demand has been raised on account of sale of his ancestral agricultural 3 -: property. Immediately, the assessee appointed a consultant and filed appeal, resulting in a delay of 32 days. The Ld.AR submitted that the delay has occurred due to late communication of assessee’s authorized representative and hence, requested for condoning the delay.