GUNI GOVINDACHETTY ASHOKKUMAR,KRISHNAGIRI V. ITO, WARD-1, KRISHNAGIRI

ITA 3144/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Guni Govindachetty Ashokkumar against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2012-13. The appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a significant delay in filing (806 days), which was not condoned. The assessee, represented by Mrs. Mathangi, Advocate, argued that health issues and the COVID-19 pandemic prevented timely filing and participation in the appellate proceedings. The Departmental Representative supported the CIT(A)'s decision to dismiss the appeal in limine. However, the Tribunal found merit in the assessee's circumstances and remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 107157 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: MATHANGI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Unexplained investment
• Section: 147; 144; 69

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ \u0011ा यपीठ, चे\u0016ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0019ी जॉज\u001c जॉज\u001c क े, उपा \u001e\u001f एवं \u0019ी एस. आर. रघुना था , लेखा सद+ क े सम\u001f BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3144/Chny/2024 िनधा \u001cरण वष\u001c /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Guni Govindachetty Ashokkumar, 3/149/4, Emakalnatham Vill & Po Bargur, Krishnagiri – 635104. [PAN: AELPA 3144A] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Krishnagiri. (अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant) (\b\tयथ\u0007/Respondent) अपीला थF की ओर से/ Appellant by : Mrs. Mathangi, Advocate HIथF की ओर से /Respondent by : Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवा ई की ता रीख/Date of Hearing : 18.02.2025 घोषणा की ता रीख /Date of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER S.R. RAGHUNATHA, A.M: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [hereinafter “CIT(A)”] for the assessment year 2012-13, vide order dated 24.09.2024. 2. There is a delay of 11 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee has filed condonation petition/affidavit stating the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. We have considered the ITA No.3144/Chny/2024 :- 2 -: petition/affidavit of delay in filing the appeal and satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. Hence, the delay is hereby condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the A.O has passed an ex- parte order u/s. 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 28.12.2019. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) on 18.04.2022 with a delay of 806 days. While filing the appeal in Form-35, the assessee filed the detailed reasons for not filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) within due date. However, the assessee has failed to file Form No.1 petition seeking for condonation of delay along with the affidavit and supporting documentary evidences demonstrating sufficient cause for 806 days delay in filing the appeal. Further, the assessee has failed to respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) by fixing the hearing dates to proceed with the appellate proceedings from 16.11.2022 to 13.09.2024. In light of the above, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine by holding as under: “20. In view of the above, I am not satisfied that the appellant had “sufficient cause” for not presenting the appeal within the due date stipulated u/s. 249(2)(b) of the Act. Accordingly, this is not a fit case to condone the delay in filing the appeal as envisaged u/s. 249(3) of the Act and, therefore, the appeal cannot be admitted. Thus, the appeal is dismissed in limine, as not admitted.” ITA No.3144/Chny/2024 :- 3 -: 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has stated that the assessee was suffering from severe diabetic problem and connected problems and hence, he could not travel to Krishnagiri from his native place to hand over the orders along with other documents to the Authorized Representatives, who filed his return of income. Further, due to his illness and the age, which has prevented him from travelling during the covid period also i.e, from the date of receipt of order 02.01.2020 to 18.04.2022. Further, the Ld. counsel for the assessee has stated that since the appeal has been dismissed in limine by the Ld. CIT(A) without condoning the delay and without the participation of the assessee in the appellate proceedings to meet the ends of justice prayed for one more opportunity before the Ld. CIT(A) to defend the assessee’s case. 5. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative stated that 806 days is a huge delay and argued that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal in limine and prayed for dismissal of the assessee’s appeal. 6. We have heard both the parties and gone through the order of the lower authorities below. We note that the assessment order was passed by the A.O on 28.12.2019 by making addition of ITA No.3144/Chny/2024 :- 4 -: Rs.1,98,17,298/- as unexplained investment u/s. 69 of the Act without participation of the assessee u/s. 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) also has dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay in filing the appeal. It is noticed that the assessee has not participated before any of the lower authorities. In the present facts and circumstances of the case by considering the age and also medical background of the assessee, we deem it fit to remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. We also direct the assessee to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and at liberty to submit the relevant details before the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of the case. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 21st February, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (जॉज\u001c जॉज\u001c क े) (George George K) उपा\u001e\u001f / Vice President (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R. Raghunatha) लेखा लेखा लेखा लेखा सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य सद\u0011य /Accountant Member चे\u0013नई/Chennai, \u0016दनांक/Dated: 21st February, 2025. EDN/- ITA No.3144/Chny/2024 :- 5 -: आदेश क\u0019 \bितिल\u001cप अ\u001dे\u001cषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ\u0007/Appellant 2. \b\tथ\u0007/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु\u000f/CIT, Salem 4. िवभागीय \bितिनिध/DR 5. गाड\u0018 फाईल/GF "