JAGANNATH RADHAKRISHNA TANDALE,NASHIK vs. THE ITO, WARD 2(1), NASHIK, NASHIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 515/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune04 August 2026AY 2017-187 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), finding that the assessee had shown sufficient cause. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the penalty issue back for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 206 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay, citing insufficient reasons. The assessee appealed this decision to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was sufficiently explained and should be condoned. Whether the penalty levied under Section 270A was sustainable on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 270A,Section 250,Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 148,Section 133A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

Hearing: 04.08.2026Pronounced: 04.08.2026

आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अिीिार्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति, आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, “A” बेंच, पुणे/ DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गार्डफ़ाइि / Guard File. 5. //True Copy//

आदेशािुसार / BY ORDER,

Assistant Registrar, आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण,/ ITAT, Pune.

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →