KANNAPIRAN,PUDUCHERRY V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3, PUDUCHERRY

ITA 3195/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Kannapiran against the order of the CIT(A) - NFAC, which was passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the Assessment Year 2018-19. The appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(A) in limine due to a delay of 102 days in filing the appeal, attributed to the assessee's financial difficulties and cessation of business activities, which also led to the cancellation of GST registration and declaration of a loan account as NPA. The Tribunal, after considering the circumstances and the evidence provided, including an affidavit for condonation of delay, decided to condone the delay and restore the matter to the AO's files, pending the outcome of the related quantum assessment appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 36127 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GOUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: V.MEENAKSHI SUNDAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘बी’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛन IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ क े, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 3195/CHNY/2024 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Kannapiran, 29, India Trailers & India Tractors, Villupuram Main Road, Villianur, Puducherry-605 110. PAN: AACPK-4471-B Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Puducherry. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Mr. V.Meenakshi Sundar, FCA ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25.02.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 26.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A) - NFAC order dated 19.10.2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2018-19. The order of the CIT(A) arises out of order imposing penalty u/s.271AAC(1) of the Act. 2. At the very outset, we notice that CIT(A) has dismissed appeal in limine without condoning delay of 102 days in filing appeal before him. The Ld.AR submitted reasons stated for belated filing - 2 - ITA No. 3195/CHNY/2024 of appeal before CIT(A) has been extracted at para 2.7 of the impugned order of the CIT(A). The reasons stated for belated filing of appeal before CIT(A) was that due to financial difficulties the business of the assessee had stopped and there was no staff available for coordinating with the Chartered Accountant for filing the appeal, hence the delay. It was stated by the Ld.AR that CIT(A) has not given any opportunity to explain the reasons for delay in filing appeal before him. It was submitted that assessee’s business had been stopped due to financial difficulties and GST registration of the assessee was cancelled. The Ld.AR has filed a paper book enclosing therein an affidavit for condonation of delay for filing appeal before the CIT(A), the order of the GST cancelling the registration, declaration of loan account as NPA etc. It was further submitted by the Ld.AR that as regards quantum assessment, the appeal is pending adjudication before CIT(A). It was submitted in the interest of justice and equity, delay of 102 days in filing appeal before the CIT(A) may be condoned and matter may be restored to the files of AO to await outcome of appeal filed as against the quantum assessment. 3. The Ld.DR supported orders of the AO and CIT(A). 4. We have heard rival submissions and perused material on record. The CIT(A) has not passed order on merits and has - 3 - ITA No. 3195/CHNY/2024 dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning delay of 102 days in filing the appeal before him. We find from record that the assessee was not given an opportunity to explain reason for the delay in filing appeal before the CIT(A). Before the Tribunal, assessee has placed on record evidence to prove that assessee’s business had stopped due to financial constraints and loan account was declared as NPA. In view of the evidences/ documents produced now before the Tribunal, we condone delay of 102 days in filing appeal before CIT(A). It is also brought on record as against quantum assessment, and appeal is pending adjudication before CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice and equity, we restore the issues raised in this appeal to the files of AO. The AO is directed to await outcome of appeal filed as against the quantum assessment and thereafter, take a decision in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th February, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (एस.आर. रघुनाथा) (S.R. RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चेÛनई/Chennai, - 4 - ITA No. 3195/CHNY/2024 Ǒदनांक/Dated, the 26th February, 2025 DS आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथȸ/Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Chennai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF. "