MANJU AGARWAL,RANCHI vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), RANCHI

ITA 1/RAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi29 July 2026AY 2016-174 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and restored the quantum appeal to the AO for readjudication. The penalty appeal was allowed as the quantum appeal was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to delay. The assessee claimed the delay was due to shifting residence and that the AO had mistakenly presumed a property sale when it was an agreement for a gift.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and whether the AO's presumption of a property sale was correct.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY&

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv
For Respondent: Shri H. Robindro Singh, CIT DR
Hearing: 29/07/2026Pronounced: 29/07/2026

Per Bench These are the two appeals filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 21.11.2024 in Appeal No. NFAC/2015-16/10303215 in the matter of assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act and in Appeal No. NFAC/2015- 16/10303217 in the matter of penalty u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act for the assessment year 2016-17. P a g e 1 | 4 & Assessment Year: 2016-17

2.

Shri H. Robindro Singh, Ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue and Shri Devesh Poddar, ld AR appeared for the assessee.

3.

It was submitted by ld. AR that the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. It was the submission tha

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 →