KARRI VENKATA SURYANARAYANA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(5), VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 350/VIZ/2026Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 September 2026AY 2015-1610 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) failed to consider the assessee's petition for condonation of delay. Therefore, the appeals were set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals against penalty and assessment orders were dismissed by the CIT(A) for delay without considering the condonation petition. The assessee argued that the petition was duly filed and overlooked by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the delay condonation petition filed by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 271(1)(b),Section 271F,Section 147,Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI MANJUNATHA G.

PER VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT:

These four appeals by the Assessee are directed against the four separate Orders all dated 30.01.2026, of the learned CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short "NFAC"], Delhi, arising from penalty orders passed u/sec.271(1)(c), 271(1)(b), 271F and assessment order passed u

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →