PAVITHRA RANGASAMY,FRANCE V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, WARD 2(1), CHENNAI

ITA 4083/CHNY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Ms. Pavithra Rangasamy against orders from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2016-17. The appeals were initially dismissed by the FAA due to delays in filing, which the FAA deemed unreasonable. However, the Tribunal found the reasons for the delay, including the assessee's relocation to France and lack of communication due to her mother-in-law's age and unfamiliarity with English, to be bona fide. Consequently, the Tribunal condoned the delay and set aside the FAA's orders, remanding the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 838547 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V. ASWATHY
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRENIK CHORDIA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; 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 Nos.: 4081, 4082 & 4083/CHNY/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Ms. Pavithra Rangasamy, 65, Avenue Puvis de Chavannes, 92400 Courbevoie, France PAN: ANTPP 7045G Vs. The Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward 2(1), Chennai. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Shrenik Chordia, CA ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. V. Aswathy, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 18.02.2026 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 20.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT: These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against three orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, all dated 30.10.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2016-17. Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.4081 to 4083/Chny/2025 :- 2 -: 2. At the very outset, we notice that the orders passed by the First Appellate Authority (FAA) are 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 appeals of the assessee in limine without adjudicating on merits. The FAA held that there is a delay of 323 days in filing the appeals against the orders of AO imposing penalty u/s.271(1)(c) & 271(1)(b) of the Act and delay of 502 days in filing the appeal against the quantum appeal 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 r.w.s.144B of the Act. 3. On perusing the orders of FAA, we note that the assessee had stated the reason for delay in filing the appeals before him. The reason stated is that the assessee is working in Tata Consultancy Services Ltd, and was offered deputed in France and relocated to France and has been domiciled in France since December, 2015. Since the assessee has completely shifted the residence to France, assessee was unaware of the notices being issued by the AO since it was delivered to her Chennai address, Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.4081 to 4083/Chny/2025 :- 3 -: where aged mother-in-law is staying. Due to old age and not conversant with English or income tax matters, her mother-in- law could not communicate the same to the assessee. Hence, the assessee could not attend the assessment proceedings. During 2024, though the assessee received e-mail communication from verification unit, from France assessee could not effectively engage a professional consultant or take protective steps to initiate necessary actions. Only during her personal visit to India, assessee could engage a professional consultant and filed appeals before the FAA, which has resulted in delay. However, the FAA rejected the assessee’s request for condonation by holding that there is no reasonable cause and dismissed the appeals of the assessee. In our view, the reason cited by assessee before FAA for belated filing of appeals are bonafide and there is reasonable cause for late filing of appeals before him. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeals before FAA. Therefore, we set aside the orders of FAA. 4. We also note that the orders passed by the AO are also ex-parte since assessee relocated to France and unaware of the assessment proceedings. Therefore, in the interest of justice and Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.4081 to 4083/Chny/2025 :- 4 -: fair play, we restore the case to the file of the AO as a last opportunity 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. 5. In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 20th 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 20th February, 2026 RSR 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 "