RAJENDRA KUMAR SINGH,AURANGABAD vs. ITO, AURANGABAD

ITA 134/PAT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 June 2026AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision. The assessee was directed to provide substantiating documents and avoid seeking unnecessary adjournments.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a delay of 591 days. The assessee had cited medical and financial hardship as reasons for the delay, and also argued that the CIT(A) failed to consider the merits of the case, which involved additions under Section 68.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay without considering the assessee's reasons and the merits of the case, particularly concerning additions under Section 68.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 250,Section 249(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, PATNA

For Respondent: Shri Mingma Sherpa, Sr. DR
Hearing: 03.06.2026Pronounced: 08.06.2026

PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)] dated

2 Rajendra Kumar Singh 23.12.2025, DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1083993465(1) on the following grounds of appeal:

“1. That the learned CIT(A), NFAC erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal in limine solely on the ground of delay of 591 days without properly appreciating the reasonable and bona fide cause shown by

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 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →