MUMBAI VIDI TAMBAKHU VYAPARI SAHAKARI PATPEDI LTD,LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 22(2)(2), PIRAMAL CHAMBER, MUMBAI

ITA 1801/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 May 2026AY 2014-155 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a 10-day delay. The assessee cited technical issues with the income tax portal and misplacement of physical documents as reasons for the delay.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reasons provided by the assessee constituted a sufficient cause for the delay. Procedural rules should favor substantial justice, and the delay did not benefit the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was sufficiently explained and should be condoned. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating the grounds on merit.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 156,Section 80P(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAVSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL

For Appellant: Shri Sushant Alme, CA (Virtually appeared)
For Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. DR

PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M.

The assessee has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 11/12/2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeals Centre (NFAC), Delhi has

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 156

All 677 judgments and leading authorities on Section 156 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →