MANOHARAN,THIRUVARU V. ITO, CIRCLE-2(1), TIRUCHIRAPPALLI

ITA 870/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Shri Manoharan against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Chennai, which were dismissed due to a delay in filing. The assessee argued that the delay was caused by severe flooding in the delta region of Tamil Nadu and the subsequent COVID-19 pandemic, during which the assessee was involved in relief activities. The Tribunal considered the circumstances and the Supreme Court's extension of limitation periods due to the pandemic, deciding to condone the delay and remand the case for a fresh decision on the merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 706888 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 27-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTHAM S.MUKUNDAN; IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: K. MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM; ITP
• Keywords: Set aside; Period of limitation; Time period of passing order

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘डी’ \u000eा यपीठ, चे\u0013ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI \u0016ी एबी टी. वक\u001b, \u000eा ियक सद एवं \u0016ी अिमता भ शु%ा , लेखा सद क े सम' BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.869 & 870/CHNY/2025 िनधा\u0005रण वष\u0005/Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 Shri Manoharan, No.9, Then Vadal South Street, Mannargudi, Thiruvarur District – 614 001. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 2(1), Trichy. [PAN: AIMPM 5419P] (अपीलाथ\u000f/Appellant) (\u0010\u0011यथ\u000f/Respondent) अपीलाथ\u000f क\u0014 ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri K. Meenakshisundaram, ITP \u0010\u0011यथ\u000f क\u0014 ओर से /Respondent by : Shri Gautham S. Mukundan, IRS (Through Virtual mode) सुनवाई क\u0014 तारीख/Date of Hearing : 13.06.2025 घोषणा क\u0014 तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 07.07.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: These are appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (hereinafter ‘the Ld.CIT(A)’), Chennai – 18 dated 24.02.2025 for Assessment Years (hereinafter ‘AYs’) 2015-16 & 2017-18 respectively. 2. At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee brought to our notice that the Ld.CIT(A) taking note of the delay in filing of the appeal by ITA Nos.869 & 870/Chny/2025 (AYs 2015-16 & 2017-18) Manoharan :: 2 :: 305 days, refused to condone the delay and without going into the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee has erroneously dismissed the assessee’s appeal which is arbitrary and want us to intervene and give one more opportunity to assessee because assessee had genuine reason for “cause of delay” in filing of appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). According to the Ld.AR, the assessee brought to the notice of the Ld.CIT(A) that for AY 2015-16, the assessment order was passed on next day i.e.,20.12.2019 and for AY 2017-18, the assessment order was passed on 21.12.2019 and the assessee was supposed to file the appeal before 30.01.2020 but could only file the appeals on 30.11.2020. Thereby the ibid appeals were belatedly filed with a delay of 305 days. The reason for causing the delay was shown in the petition for condoning the delay and affidavit supporting the averments made therein, which contents shows that assessee hails from delta region of Tamil Nadu and there was unusual heavy flood in January 2020 and the cause of delay was attributed to flood in delta region of Tamil Nadu coupled with spread of Covid-19 pandemic; and the assessee being a politician was carrying out / organizing the State machinery along with the public participation, the relief to the flood affected persons and by the time ITA Nos.869 & 870/Chny/2025 (AYs 2015-16 & 2017-18) Manoharan :: 3 :: two months lapsed and by 20.03.2020, the Covid-19 pandemic hit India and the Hon’ble Supreme Court suo-moto has condoned the delay / extended the limitation period up to May 2022. Therefore, actually the delay would be only sixty (60) days in filing of appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Hence, he pleaded that the delay may be condoned, since it was not deliberate or willful. Therefore, pleaded for condoning the delay by filing of condonation petition along with the affidavit to support the aforesaid averments. Therefore, he prays for one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A). 3. Per contra, the Ld.DR does not want us to condone the delay and does not want to interfere with the action of the Ld.CIT(A). 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We note that since the assessment orders were passed on 20.12.2019/21.12.2019, the assessee had to file the appeals before the Ld.CIT(A) by 30.01.2020. However, he being a politician was spearheading the flood relief activities in the deccan region of Tamil Nadu which was affected by unusual flood in ITA Nos.869 & 870/Chny/2025 (AYs 2015-16 & 2017-18) Manoharan :: 4 :: December/January,2020. After this calamity was over, Covid-19 pandemic hit India and there were restrictions placed by the Government in the movement of public which led to the cause of delay of 305 days in filing the appeal and the appeal was filed only on 30.11.2020. In order to buttress, the aforesaid facts, the assessee has filed application for condoning the delay along with affidavit and other relevant papers; and taking judicial notice of the Hon’ble Supreme Court suo-moto order in Miscellaneous Application No.665 of 2021 vide order dated 23.03.2020 and other order dated 10.01.2022 extending period of limitation from 15.03.2020 to 31.03.2022, we note that there was only sixty days delay in filing of appeals, if we exclude the Covid-19 period. Therefore, we are of the view that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing both the appeals and therefore, we condone the delay in filing of appeals before the Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, we set aside the impugned orders of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeals back to his file with a direction to adjudicate the grounds of appeals raised by the assessee as provided for under sub-section (6) to Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and pass speaking orders after hearing the assessee. The assessee is directed to diligently participate in the ITA Nos.869 & 870/Chny/2025 (AYs 2015-16 & 2017-18) Manoharan :: 5 :: appellate proceedings and file written submission / relevant documents supporting the grounds of appeals raised before the Ld.CIT(A). 5. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 07th July, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- (अिमताभ शु ा) (AMITABH SHUKLA) लेखा सद\u0003य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Sd/- (एबी टी. वक\u0012) (ABY T. VARKEY) \u0005याियक सद\u0003य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे\u0017ई/Chennai, \u0019दनांक/Dated: 07th July, 2025. RSR आदेश की (ितिलिप अ)ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीला थ\u001b/Appellant, 2.(,थ\u001b/ Respondent, 3. आयकर आयु-/CIT, Madurai 4. िवभा गीय (ितिनिध/DR & 5. गा ड0 फा ईल/GF. "