PALANI RAGAVENDRAN,TIRUVANNAMALAI V. ITO, WARD-1, , TIRUVANNAMALAI

ITA 4026/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Palani Ragavendran against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2020-21. The FAA had dismissed the appeal in limine due to a significant delay in filing, which the FAA found to lack reasonable cause. The original assessment was made under best judgment assessment provisions due to non-compliance by the assessee with notices from the AO. The Tribunal, noting the assessee's lack of awareness of the assessment order and subsequent delay in filing the appeal, decided to condone the delay and remand the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need for fair play and justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839087 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V AWASTHY
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHISHEK MURALI
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, ‘डी’ Ûयायपीठ, चेÛनई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI Įी जॉज[ जॉज[ क े, उपाÚय¢ एवं Įी इंटूरȣ रामा राव, लेखा सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 4026/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2020-21 Shri Palani Ragavendran, No.10/43, Kumara Koil Street, Tiruvannamalai – 606 601. PAN: BFZPR 9478E Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Tiruvannamalai (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Dr. Abhishek Murali, CA ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. V Awasthy, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 17.02.2026 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 18.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 04.10.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2020-21. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4026/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: 2. At the very outset, we notice that the order passed by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) is ex-parte, since there was no compliance from the assessee to the notices issued from the office of the First Appellate Authority. The FAA had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine without adjudicating on merits. The FAA held that there is a delay of 116 days in filing the appeal before him and there is no reasonable cause for condoning the same. Further, we also notice that the assessment has been completed on best judgment assessment u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act. 3. On perusing the order of FAA, we noted that the assessee in Form 35 has stated the reason for delay, that the assessee is unaware of the assessment order being passed by the AO since no physical communication was received. The assessee became aware of the order being passed only on receipt of call from Income-tax office directing the assessee to pay outstanding tax arrears and immediately, he filed appeal before FAA, which resulted in delay of 117 days. However, the FAA rejected the assessee’s request for condonation by holding that there is no reasonable cause and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. In our view, the reason cited by assessee before FAA seems quite reasonable and hence, we condone the delay before FAA. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4026/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: Therefore, we set aside the order of FAA. We also note that the order passed by the AO is also best judgment since assessee has not responded to the notices issued from the office of the AO. We strongly deprecate the nonchalant attitude of the assessee in not responding to the notices issued from the offices of the FAA and the AO. However, in the interest of justice and fair play, we are of the view that the matter ought to be restored to the files of the AO as a last opportunity. Accordingly, the matter is remitted to the files of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly. 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 18th February, 2026 at Chennai. Sd/- Sd/- (इंटूरȣ रामा राव) (INTURI RAMA RAO) लेखा सदèय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (जॉज[ जॉज[ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 18th February, 2026 RSR Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.4026/Chny/2025 :- 4 -: 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. Printed from counselvise.com "