SESHU BABU POLU,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), GUNTUR

ITA 836/VIZ/2025Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 July 2026AY 2017-185 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT directed the CIT(A) to condone the delay of 73 days, citing a liberal approach for procedural delays. The appeal was set aside to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, with a penalty imposed on the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a 73-day delay and lack of a condonation petition. The assessee claimed the delay was due to medical reasons and non-receipt of hearing notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned due to medical reasons and non-receipt of notices, and whether the appeal should be decided on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

PER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.CIT(A)”], NFAC, Delhi vide DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081514911(1) dated 07.10.2025,

ITA 836/VIZ/2025 Seshu Babu Polu

arising out of the order dated 02.01.2025 passed by the Ld.AO u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for the Assessment Year 20

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 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →