RENU SHARMA,ETAH ,UTTAR PRADESH vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(3)(1), ETAH, ETAH

ITA 404/AGR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Agra22 July 2026AY 2013-20143 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. While acknowledging the assessee's non-cooperative conduct, the Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in the interest of justice, directing the assessee to be cooperative.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte. The ITAT noted a significant delay in filing the current appeal, which was condoned due to the assessee's rural background and claim of non-receipt of the order. The original assessment order was also passed ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) and the original ex-parte assessment order were justified, and if the assessee was afforded sufficient opportunity of hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA(SMC

Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGHBRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Singhal, CA
For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr (DR)
Hearing: 20.07.2026Pronounced: 20.07.2026

PER:SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 26.09.2024 passed in appeal No NFAC/2012-13/10171927 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax/ NFAC(Delhi) (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A) u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2013-14, wherein ld CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal ex-parte.

2.

At the very outset, it is noticed that according to registry’s report, this second appeal was filed on 06.05.2026 against the impugned order dated 26.09.2024 as time barred by a delay of about 523 days. The reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay are that, the assessee was not served with the impugned order. The same was received be

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 →