KALI DURAI,KAIVELI V. ITO, VILLUPURAM

ITA 2357/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Kali Durai, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2020-21. The primary contention was the dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's failure to justify the delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had valid reasons for the delay, which were not adequately considered by the CIT(A). The Tribunal's decision emphasizes the need for the CIT(A) to reassess the case on its merits after acknowledging the reasonable cause for the delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 788195 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M. SUBASHRI; VIRTUAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SONALI KHATOD
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’ए’ Ɋायपीठ, चेɄई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI ŵी एस.एस. िवʷनेũ रिव, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी जगदीश, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ । Before Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member & Shri Jagadish, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2357/Chny/2025 िनधाŊरण वषŊ/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Kali Durai, Ravi Illam, No. 3, MGR Street, Thanthai periyar Nagar, Kaiveli, Chennai 600 042. [PAN:CCWPD7680C] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward I, Villupuram. (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ/Respondent) अपीलाथŎ की ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. Sonali Khatod, C.A. ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. CIT (Virtual) सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 20.11.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.11.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17.03.2025 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 87 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2357/Chny/25 2 we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee raised 5 grounds of appeal amongst which, the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating the grounds on merits by rejecting the condonation petition filed by the assessee 4. We note that the Assessing Officer completed the assessment order under section 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] by assessing total income of the assessee at ₹.1,26,01,277/- against the returned income at ₹.39,63,380/-, inter alia, making addition of ₹.86,37,897/- towards variation in respect of issue of 60% of receipts treated as other income as per para 4.6(ii) of the assessment order. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay for the reason that the assessee failed to justify the delay in filing the appeal. 5. The ld. AR Ms. Sonali Khatod, C.A. submits that the assessee was not aware of the assessment proceedings and filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) immediately after knowing the passing of assessment order and Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2357/Chny/25 3 demand passed under section 144 of the Act. Belated filing of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is neither willful nor wanton and the ld. AR prayed that suitable directions may be given to the ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay and adjudicate the issue on merits. 6. The ld. DR Ms. M. Subashri, Addl. CIT supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that the assessee explained the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal and in para 5.1 of the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) has reproduced the reasons for the delay stated by the assessee, but, however, rejected the submissions of the assessee and dismissed the appeal by observing at para 5.24 of the impugned order that the application is lacking merit to condone the delay. We have perused the reasons stated by the assessee and reproduced at para 5.1 of the impugned order as well as considering the submissions of the ld. AR, the reasons stated by the assessee for the delay in filing the appeal, are found to be reasonable cause. Accordingly, we direct the ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay and adjudicate the issue on merits after considering the submissions/ evidences as may be furnished by the assessee and Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.2357/Chny/25 4 pass order in accordance with law. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 25th November, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (JAGADISH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER Chennai, Dated, 25.11.2025 Vm/- आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant, 2.ŮȑथŎ/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयुƅ/CIT, Chennai/Madurai/Coimbatore/Salem 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR & 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF. Printed from counselvise.com "