GNANESH MITTA,TIRUPATI vs. ITO, WARD - 1(1), TIRUPATI

ITA 859/HYD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 September 2026AY 2017-187 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to dismiss the appeal in limine due to an inordinate delay of 820 days. The assessee failed to provide any sufficient cause for the delay, either before the CIT(A) or the Tribunal.

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited Specified Bank Notes (SBNs) amounting to Rs. 2,40,500/- during demonetization. The Assessing Officer treated this as undisclosed income under Section 69A and taxed it under Section 115BBE due to the assessee's failure to provide details of the source.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable and if the appeal should be dismissed in limine without adjudicating on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ SMC ‘ Bench, Hyderabad

PER MANJUNATHA G., A.M : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short “NFAC”], Delhi, dated 29.01.2026, pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is

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 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →