MUKANDA RAM,POST BOSANA VIA LOSAL vs. ITO WD 1, SIKAR, SIKAR

ITA 778/JPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 September 2026AY 2019-205 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 111 days, finding sufficient cause due to the assessee's personal circumstances. The case was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay of 111 days without condonation. The assessee, a retired BSF personnel, claimed sufficient cause for the delay due to his daughter's cancer treatment.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable due to sufficient cause. Whether the assessment was bad in law due to procedural defects in issuing notices.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR “A” BENCH, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI KULDIP SINGH & SHRI PRAKASH, ACCOUNTANCT MEMBER

PER : KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

The Appellant, Mukanda Ram (hereinafter referred to as the ‘assessee’) by filing the present appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 30.01.2026 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] qua assessment year 2019-20 on the grounds inter-alia that:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT Appeals erred in dismissing the appeal as not admitted due to delay in filing of appeal.

I.T.A No. 778/JPR/2026 Page No 2 Mukanda Ram

2.

On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. AO grossly erred in making additions of Rs. 87,16,58

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 148A

All 3,543 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →