SANJAY AWASTHI,BHAWARNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYKAR BHAWAN PALAMPUR

ITA 1015/CHANDI/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 September 2026AY 2024-20256 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 59 days, finding the assessee's explanation to be bona fide and constituting sufficient cause. The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits as the original appeal was not decided on grounds.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine for being barred by limitation by 59 days. The assessee explained the delay by stating that the e-mail and mobile number linked to the Income-tax portal belonged to an accountant, and the assessee lacked access to them, leading to delayed knowledge of the assessment order.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was sufficiently explained to warrant condonation, and if so, whether the appeal should be decided on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 249(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH, ‘SMC’ CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Ansuman Sharma, CA
For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Hearing: 08.09.2026Pronounced: 09.09.2026

The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)NFAC [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 17.03.2026 passed for assessment year 2024-25. 2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine by treating the same as barred by limitation, without adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee on merits. It was submitted that there was A.Y.2024-25 2 a delay of 59 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A), which was neither deliberate nor intentional. The learned counsel

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 249(3)

All 1,376 judgments and leading authorities on Section 249(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →