SAMIDHA JITESH JAGDALE,BADLAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), KALYAN, KALYAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2933/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 July 2026AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in not providing the assessee an opportunity to explain the delay before dismissing the appeal. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) to allow the assessee to explain the delay and to decide the case on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a significant delay in filing. The assessment was completed on September 21, 2021, and the appeal was filed on December 25, 2024, with a delay of over four years. The assessee claimed reasonable cause for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal without providing an opportunity to explain the delay. Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 254(1),Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 19.02.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal before him. The appellant submits that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the delay was caused due to reasonable and sufficient reasons, and therefore, he ought to have condoned the delay. Your appellant, therefore, prays that the aforesaid delay may kindly be condoned, and the matter be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on its merits. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not deleting the addition of Rs.67,11,000/- made by the Ld. AO being alleged short term capital gain earned by the appellant. Your appellant, therefore, prays that the aforesaid addition of Rs.67,11,000/- be deleted.

Samidha Jitesh Jagdale ITA No. 2933/Mum/2026 (AY: 2013-14)

2.

Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by not condoning the delay before him. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessment was completed on 21.09.2021 under section 147 r.w.s. 144B. The appeal before ld. CIT(A) was filed on 25.12.2024. Thus, there was a delay of more than four (4) years. There was reasonable cause for condoning such delay. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that no opportunity to explain the delay was allowed by ld. CIT(A). The assessee may be allowed to explain the delay before ld. CIT(A). Further, the ld. CIT(A) may be directed to consider the case of assessee on merits. 3. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue submits that there is inordinate delay in filing appeal before ld. CIT(A). As per copy of affidavit filed for the first time before Tribunal, the assessee admitted the delay of 1148 days in filing appeal. No such affidavit was filed before ld CIT(A). Even this affidavit does not disclose any reasonable cause, thus, the assessee does not observe any leniency at this stage. 4. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties. We find that there is no dispute that assessee were completed on 21.09.2021. The assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A) on 25.12.2024. Thus, there was a substantial delay in filing first appeal before ld CIT(A). Perusal of impugned 2

Samidha Jitesh Jagdale ITA No. 2933/Mum/2026 (AY: 2013-14) order shows that before dismissal of appeal by ld. CIT(A), no opportunity to explain the delay was allowed to the assessee. Thus, keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the matter is restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) with the direction to allow reasonable opportunity to assessee to explain the delay. The assessee is also directed to furnish application / affidavit in explaining the cause of delay. The ld. CIT(A) is also directed to consider the case on merit. The assessee is directed to provide complete details and evidences for adjudication of case on merit. With this observation, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order was pronounced in the open Court on 13 /07/2026.

/- S/- Sd/- /- Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT PAWAN SINGH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated:13/07/2026 Biswajit Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Mumbai; and (5) Guard file. By Order

Assistant Registrar ITAT, Mumbai 3

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →