<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (6) TMI 1617 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773504</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed appeals filed by legal heirs of a deceased assessee against assessment and penalty orders. The CIT(A) had dismissed appeals citing delays of five and eight days without verifying actual receipt dates or providing opportunity to explain the delay, violating natural justice principles. The Tribunal condoned delays of 120 days before itself and the original delays before CIT(A), emphasizing &quot;justice should not only be done, but must be seen to be done.&quot; Assessment and penalty orders were held valid as they were passed before the assessee&#039;s death. The matter was remanded to CIT(A) for admission and decision on merits, with all substantive issues left open for adjudication after hearing parties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2025 08:25:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=831154" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 1617 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773504</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed appeals filed by legal heirs of a deceased assessee against assessment and penalty orders. The CIT(A) had dismissed appeals citing delays of five and eight days without verifying actual receipt dates or providing opportunity to explain the delay, violating natural justice principles. The Tribunal condoned delays of 120 days before itself and the original delays before CIT(A), emphasizing &quot;justice should not only be done, but must be seen to be done.&quot; Assessment and penalty orders were held valid as they were passed before the assessee&#039;s death. The matter was remanded to CIT(A) for admission and decision on merits, with all substantive issues left open for adjudication after hearing parties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773504</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>