SHRI RAM SINGH CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(4), JAIPUR

ITA 1082/JPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 September 2026AY 2012-1310 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the significant delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A), finding sufficient cause due to the assessee's lack of awareness of tax laws and the consultant's admitted failure. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file his return of income for AY 2012-13, leading to an ex-parte assessment order. The assessee also failed to file appeals against the assessment order and penalty order within the prescribed time, citing reasons related to the COVID-19 pandemic and his consultant's negligence.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) was sufficiently explained and should be condoned, and whether the assessee's explanation constituted a reasonable cause.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR

Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA

Hearing: 09.09.2026Pronounced: 14.09.2026

Per Annapurna Gupta, AM:- Both the appeals relate to the same assessee, arising from separate orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi(hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”), of even date 10.02.2026 and pertain to thesame assessment year. While one appeal arises in order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) against the order passed by the Assessing

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 1082 and 1083/JPR/2026 Shri Ram Singh Choudhary Officer in quantum proceedings under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), theother appeal is against order of the Ld.CIT(A) confirming the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act.Since the issues raised in both the ap

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 →