MEENA NACHRANI, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 361/RPR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Raipur15 July 2026AY 2017-1815 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. The matter was remanded back for de novo adjudication, emphasizing the principles of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC due to non-compliance. The assessee filed a condonation petition for the delay in filing the appeal, which was accepted.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC due to non-compliance can be sustained, and if the matter should be remanded for adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(4),Section 250(6),Section 251(1)(a),Section 251(1)(b),Section 251(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “DB”, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Jain, CA
For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Hearing: 14.07.2026Pronounced: 15.07.2026

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 08.12.2025 for the assessment year 2017-18 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2.

At the very outset, it is noted that the appeal is time barred by 60 days. That explaining the said delay, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted condonation petition a/w. affidavit, dated 27.04.2026. The relevant contents of the said affidavit ar

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 251(1)(a)

All 935 judgments and leading authorities on Section 251(1)(a) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →