RAVI KUNDRA,AGRA vs. ITO, WARD 1(1)(2), AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 463/AGR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Agra09 July 2026AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging the reasons provided by the assessee. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, with a direction for the assessee to be cooperative.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a second appeal before the ITAT with a significant delay of 815 days. The delay was attributed to the assessee not being properly served with the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order. The CIT(A) had confirmed a penalty of Rs. 57,68,500/- imposed under Section 271(1)(c).

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the matter should be remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA(DB

Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGHBRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CA
For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr (DR)
Hearing: 07.07.2026Pronounced: 07.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA(DB) BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 463/Agr/2026 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Ravi Kundra, Vs. ITO, Ward 1(1)(2), Aaykar 13/39, Char Bagh, Shahganj, Bhawan, Agra-282002 Sikandra S.O.(Agra), Panwari, Agra-282007 PAN :AHEPK1044R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CA Department by Shri Anil Kumar, Sr (DR) Date of hearing 07.07.2026 Date of pronouncement 07.07.2026 ORDER PER:SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 26.12.2023 passed in appeal No NFAC/2011-12/10068892 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. 2012-13, wherein ld CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal ex-parte, confirming the penalty of Rs. 57,68,500/- imposed, vide penalty order dated 09.12.2021 passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.

ITA No.463/Agr/2026

2.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. 3. We notice that the assessee filed this second appeal on 25.05.2026 against the impugned order dated 26.12.2023 by a delay of about 815 days. The reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay are that, the assessee was served with the impugned order digitally and not by other modes, assessee was informed about the impugned order only when his tax consultant logged in to the IT portal. Affidavit has been filed by the assessee in support of delay condonation application. The aforesaid reasons supported with uncontroverted affidavit are sufficient. We deem it just and proper to condone the said delay in filing this appeal. The delay is accordingly condoned. 4. It transpires form the perusal of records that notices on 06.10.2022, 05.12.2023 and 13.12.2023 were issued by the first appellate authority to the assessee. However, the assessee did not respond in compliance thereof. The ld CIT(A) was thus compelled to pass ex-parte impugned order. The non-cooperative conduct of the assessee cannot be appreciated. However, in the interest of justice, we deem it just and appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of ld CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. We, further, direct the assessee

2 | P a g e

ITA No.463/Agr/2026

to be diligent and cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the ld CIT(A) for the expeditious and effective disposal. Needless to say that ld CIT(A) shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on- 07.07.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 09.07.2026 *AS, PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra

3 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →