MOHD HASSAN,BADGAM vs. ITO, WARD 1(1). JAMMU, JAMMU

ITA 115/ASR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 July 2026AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was prevented from filing the appeal in time due to sufficient cause. Therefore, the delay was condoned, and the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) solely on the grounds of delay in filing. The assessee had filed a delay condonation petition before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable and should be condoned.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH AM, &

For Appellant: CA िाजस्व की ओि से/
For Respondent: Smt. Kulwinder Kaur, Sr.DR
Hearing: 30.07.2026Pronounced: 31.07.2026

PER M. BALAGANESH, AM: This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 16.12.2025 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi for Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal in limine only on the ground of delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly, he pleaded that the matter may be restored back to the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (ld. ‘CIT(A)’ in short.)

2 115/Asr/2026

3.

On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue re

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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →