SHREE DIGAMBAR JAIN SAMITI TRUST,RISHRA vs. I.T.O.,WARD 1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 406/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 June 2026AY 2018-195 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the inordinate delay of 1753 days in filing the appeal. The tribunal set aside the CIT(Appeals) order and remitted the matter back for fresh adjudication on merits to ensure natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee trust filed an appeal before the CIT(Appeals) after a delay of 1753 days, citing lack of proper advice and non-receipt of physical notices. The CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay, stating insufficient cause.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was sufficiently caused and should be condoned. The issue of whether the appeal should be decided on merits after condoning the delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 249(2),Section 154,Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)

ITA No. 406/KOL/2026 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Shree Digambar Jain Samity Trust IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) I.T.A. No. 406/KOL/2026 Assessment Year: 2018-2019 Shree Digambar Jain Samiti Trust,……...…Appellant 35/X, Netaji Subhash Road, Rishra, Hooghly-712248, West Bengal [PAN:AAKTS4541C] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………..…..Respondent Ward-1(3), Exemption, Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Road, Kolkata-700071 Appearances by: Shri Mohit Sharma, A.R. appeared on behalf of the assessee Ms. Sima Das Biswas, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: June 09, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order: June 22, 2026 O R D E R

The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of Id. Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Chandigarh dated 24.11.2025 passed for Assessment Year 2018-2019.

2.

The appeal is time barred by 1753 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals). The appellant has not established the supported reason before the ld. 1

ITA No. 406/KOL/2026 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Shree Digambar Jain Samity Trust Addl./JCIT(Appeals) to substantiate the day-to-day delay of 1753 days duration with ‘sufficient cause’ given in Form 35 with documentary evidence. The assessee in Form No. 35 has stated that he could not file the appeal in time as the assessee was not properly advised or assisted for the income tax matters and no physical notice as to demand raised has been received by assessee- Trust at the assessee-Trust’s registered Office address for the said Assessment Year 2018-19 and also for any previous assessment years. Hence, as per the fundamental principle in tax law, a valid assessment must begin with valid service of notice at the registered office address in physical. The assessee had already updated his office address in the PAN database and used the same in its ITR. However, no acknowledgement or delivery proof of service of demand notice is available on records. The grievance of the assessee that no physical notice was ever sent through postal authorities is shallow and bereft of merits and for this reason, the assessee was unable to comprehend the appropriate course of action to be taken. The ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) was of the opinion that in absence of any substantiation, the grounds for condonation of delay as mentioned by the assessee, is merely a bald assertion without any basis, which is not supported by cogent and proper evidence and the same would not, as such, constitute ‘sufficient cause’ within the meaning of section 249(2) of the Act. The ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) did not condone the delay and without condoning the delay dismissed the appeal of the assessee without going into merits of the case as there was no sufficient cause for condonation of the inordinate delay in filing of the appeal as well as negligent attitude on the part of the appellant by mentioning

ITA No. 406/KOL/2026 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Shree Digambar Jain Samity Trust that this case is not fit for condonation of delay within the specified time limit before him. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT.

3.

It was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that against the intimation issued under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, the assessee had filed rectification application under section 154 of the Act. It was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that as the rectification application was not disposed of, the assessee had left with no other alternative but to file an appeal before the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals), which caused a delay of nearly 1753 days. It was the submission that if the delay is not condoned, then it would be injustice to the assessee in so far as the issue is in favour of the assessee. It was the prayer by the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the delay may be condoned and the issues may be restored to the file of ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) for adjudication afresh on merits. He prayed before the Bench to set aside the order passed by the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals).

4.

In reply, ld. Departmental Representative did not raise any serious objection in restoring the issues to the file of ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) for re-adjudication on merits.

5.

I have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of assessee due to delay in not furnishing the appeal in time before him. It was the

ITA No. 406/KOL/2026 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Shree Digambar Jain Samity Trust submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that as the rectification application was not disposed of, the assessee had left with no other alternative but to file an appeal before the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) and this has caused a delay of nearly 1753 days in filing appeal before the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals). Considering the facts and circumstances, the delay of 1753 days in presenting appeal before the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) is condoned. I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) and in order to meet the principle of natural justice, remit the matter back to the file of the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) failing which the ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to dispose of the appeal by passing appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/06/2026.

Sd/- (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 22nd day of June, 2026

ITA No. 406/KOL/2026 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Shree Digambar Jain Samity Trust Copies to :(1) Shree Digambar Jain Samiti Trust, 35/X, Netaji Subhash Road, Rishra, Hooghly-712248, West Bengal (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Exemption, Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Road, Kolkata-700071 (3) Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Chandigarh; (4) CIT - ; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order

Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha

More judgments on Section 249(2)

All 636 judgments and leading authorities on Section 249(2) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →