BANSIDHAR BAIJNATH JALAN SEVA TRUST, ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), EXEMPT, KOLKATA,, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1554/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 July 2026AY 2021-20224 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 195 days, citing the need for substantial justice and liberal interpretation of sufficient cause for delay. The matter was remanded to the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on its merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 195 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to this delay. The assessee explained the delay as waiting for an order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) regarding a rectification application.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was sufficiently explained and should be condoned. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH,

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Pransukhka, AR
For Respondent: Shri Sandip Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 22.07.2026Pronounced: 24.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1554/KOL/2026 Assessment Year: 2021-22

Bansidhar Baijnath Jalan Seva Vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Trust Exemption, Kolkata 61, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Sealdah, Kolkata West Bengal-700009 [PAN: AAATB6574C] APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri S.K. Pransukhka, AR Respondent by : Shri Sandip Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 22.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 24.07.2026 O R D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER: This Appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) dated 27.02.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the Assessment Year 2021-22.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that, an Order came to be passed u/s 154 of the Act on 24.01.2023 by rejecting the application filed by the Assessee for rectification of the order dated 16.12.2021 passed by the CPC. Aggrieved by the Order dated 24.01.2023, Assessee filed an

ITA No.1554/Kol/2026 Bansidhar Baijnath Jalan Seva Trust; A.Y: 2021-22 Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide Order dated 16.02.2026, dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee on delay in latches. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 16.02.2026, Assessee filed the present Appeal.

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that, though there was sufficient cause to condone the delay, the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay, thus sought for allowing the Appeal.

4.

The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that there was no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay of 195 days in filing the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the first appeal of the Assessee in delay in latches, thus, sought for dismissal of the present Appeal.

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 27.12.2016, the Assessee preferred Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 195 days. As per the Assessee, the cause of the delay in filing the appeal was explained hereunder: -

(a) That the assessee after receiving the rectification order, filed application for condonation of delay in filing Form 10B with the Commissioner of Income tax (Exemption), Kolkata, on 23.02.2023. (b) That the assessee waited for the order of the Commissioner of Income tax (Exemption), hoping that the result would be favourable.

ITA No.1554/Kol/2026 Bansidhar Baijnath Jalan Seva Trust; A.Y: 2021-22

(c) That Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata finally disposed off the condonation petition on 24.08.2023 rejecting the petition of the assessee. The assessee is preferring appeal now against the rectification order passed by CPC on 24/01/2023 (4) The appellant most humbly prays before your Honour that the delay may please be condoned in as much as there is a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal in time in view of the facts stated hereinabove. However, the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and dismissed the Appeal.

6.

It is expected from the Assessee to file the Appeal on time, if the cause for delay is bona- fide and beyond the control of the Assessee, the same can be construed as sufficient cause. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 195 days in filing the first Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.

ITA No.1554/Kol/2026 Bansidhar Baijnath Jalan Seva Trust; A.Y: 2021-22 7. In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 24.07.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 24.07.2026 DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //TRUE COPY//

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →