NAVAL KISHORE AGARWAL,CHENNAI V. ACIT, CPC, BANGALORE

ITA 1825/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Naval Kishore Agarwal against the order of the CIT(A), which confirmed the assessment order under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2020-21. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal due to a delay of 314 days in filing without valid reasons. The assessee argued that the delay was due to unfamiliarity with the faceless working of the department and a belief that the Supreme Court had extended deadlines due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's request for a fresh adjudication and set aside the CIT(A)'s order, directing a re-examination of the case while imposing a cost for the delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772024 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VEERAMANY K; IRS
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

"cआयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, ’डी’ न्यायपीठ, चेन्नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय श्री मनु क ुमार धिरर ,न्याधयक सदस्य एवं माननीय श्री अमिताभ शुक्ला, लेखा सदस्य क े सिक्ष BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND HON’BLE SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1825/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: - 2020-21 Naval Kishore Agarwal, No.B-101, Prince Garden Apartment, No.40, Thambusamy Road, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. [PAN: AACPN6822D] The Income Tax Officer, CHE-(116)(1), Chennai (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assesseee by : Mr.N.Quadir Hoseyn, Advocate & Mr.Natrajan, C.A प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Mr.Veeramany K, IRS सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.08.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / APL / S / 250 / 2025-26 / 1075627599(1) dated 15.04.2025 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), Adll/JCIT(A)-7, Delhi, for the assessment year 2020-21. The reference to the word “Act” in this order hereinafter shall mean the Income Tax Act, 1961 as amended from time to time. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1825 /Chny/2025 Page - 2 - of 4 2.0 At the outset the Ld. Counsel for the assessee informed that the Ld. First Appellate Authority has passed an ex-parte order thereby confirming the assessment order u/s 143(1) dated 18.12.2021 of the CPC and that the appeal was dismissed for being filed late without any justified grounds. It was pleaded that the assessee had committed delay of 314 days and for which it had justified grounds. It was stated that the assessee is not conversant with faceless working of the department. The assessee also submitted that it was under belief that Supreme Court has extended the timeline for filing of applications on account of Covid-19 pandemic. The appellant further contested the addition made u/s 10(2A) was agitated by way of an application u/s 154 which is still pending. The Ld.CIT(A) held that assessee did not have a valid reason for delay and proceeded to dismiss the appeal. The Ld. Counsel submitted the matter may be restored to Ld. CIT(A) for readjudication on its merits and that it shall make full compliance to the notices of Ld. CIT(A). In support of its contentions, the Ld. Counsel filed a paper book. 3.0 Per contra, the Ld.DR relied upon the order of lower authorities. It was however contended that costs be imposed upon the assessee for wasting the precious time of the courts. 4.0 We have heard rival submissions in the light of material available on records. There is no denying the fact that the assessee has filed delayed appeal before the Ld.First Appellate Authority. We are Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1825 /Chny/2025 Page - 3 - of 4 conscious that no litigant benefits by non-prosecution of its case. We have also noted that issue at hand involves, adjustment u/s 143(1) which is an exempt item u/s 10(2A). Be that as it may be we are of the considered view that in the interest of justice the matter deserves remission to Ld.First Appellate Authority. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld.First Appellate Authority and direct the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the appeal after condoning the delay and giving due opportunity of being heard. He shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law. The assessee shall be bounden to make all compliances to the statutory notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A). This order is however subject to a cost of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) to be paid by the assessee to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority at Hon’ble High Court of Madras within 30 days of the receipt of this order. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are therefore allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1825 /Chny/2025 Page - 4 - of 4 5.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 25th , Aug-2025 at Chennai. Sd/- (मनु क ुमार धिरर) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) न्याधयक सदस्य / Judicial Member Sd/- (अधमताभ शुक्ला) (AMITABH SHUKLA) लेखा सदस्य /Accountant Member चेन्नई/Chennai, धदनांक/Dated: 25th , Aug-2025. KB/- आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy to: 1. अिीिार्थी/Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुक्त/CIT - Chennai/Coimbatore/Madurai/Salem. 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति/DR 5. गार्ड फाईि/GF Printed from counselvise.com "