What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that while the reasons for delay appeared bonafide, the assessee failed to file a proper application for condonation of delay. Therefore, the case was remanded to the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision on the limitation point and condonation of delay.

The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner after a delay of 506 days, excluding the Covid-19 period. The assessee cited the death of his son and his own role as the sole bread earner as reasons for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld. Commissioner should condone the delay in filing the appeal and decide the case on merits, or dismiss the appeal for want of limitation due to a defective application.

Balkrishna Devraj Dubey… vs ITO | ITAT Mumbai 2025

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, Ld. A.R

For Respondent: Shri Adesh Rai, Ld. Sr. D.R. (Virtually)

Hearing: 18.09.2025Pronounced: 18.09.2025

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 03.07.2025, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short “Ld. Commissioner”) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2017-18.

At the outset, it is observed that there was delay of 506 days after excluding Covid-19 period, as exempted/excluded by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the suo-motu case number 3/2020, the delay period, in filling of 1st appeal before the Ld. Commissioner against the assessment order dated 26.12.2019 and the Assessee just by answering/mentioning in Form no. 35:

14.

Whether there is delay in : YES filling appeal

15.

If reply to 14 is Yes, enter : Yes, inadvertent mistake of the Assessee the rounds for delay

Neither filed any application for condonation of delay nor submitted any affidavit and therefore the Ld. Commissioner was constrained to dismiss the appeal in limine for want of limitation.

The Assessee by filling a duly sworn affidavit has claimed that in Covid-19 period his son has expired and therefore he started living in Mumbai and the Assessee is the only bread earner of his family and therefore the delay may be condoned.

Though the reason for delay which is otherwise duly supported with sworn affidavit, appears to as bonafide, genuine and unintentional, however the Assessee before the Ld. Commissioner failed to file any proper application for condonation of delay, thus for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, this Court is inclined to remand the case to the file of Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh on limitation point or application for condonation of delay along with duly sworn affidavit, which the Assessee undertakes to file . Suffice to say that the Ld. Commissioner shall afford a reasonable opportunity for filling of application for condonation of delay along with affidavit and of being heard to the Assessee. It is also clarified that the Ld. Commissioner in the event of condoning the delay, shall decide the appeal on merit.

The Assessee is directed to comply with the notices to be issued by the Ld. Commissioner and file the application for condonation of delay along with affidavit and relevant submissions/documents, as would be essentially required for proper and just decision of the case.

It is clarified that in case of subsequent default, the Assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency. Thus, the case is remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh accordingly.

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18.09.2025.

BALKRISHNA DEVRAJ DUBEY,BHAYANDER EAST, MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 42(2)(1), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments