What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It found that the lower appellate authority dismissed the appeal without considering legal issues and proper notice service. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a significant delay of 417 days, claiming non-receipt of notices due to incorrect email communication and being a senior citizen with ailments. The assessee only became aware of the orders when their bank account was seized.

What were the issues?

Whether proper notice under Section 143(2) was served on the assessee and if legal issues were considered by the appellate authority.

Diwakar Daulatrao Bhongade, Nagpur vs ITO | s.143(2), 250 | ITAT Nagpur 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR

For Appellant: Shri Bhavesh Moriyani, Adv

For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr. DR

Hearing: 12.06.2026Pronounced: 15.06.2026

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi, (for short, “CIT(A)”), dated 22/10/2024 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”), for the Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19.

ITA No. 113/NAG/2026 (Diwakar Daulatrao Bhongade) 2. On hearing both the sides, we find that there is a delay of 417 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal and an application for condonation of delay along with affidavit is filed wherein it is claimed that notices were sent on e–mail address which does not belong to the assessee. It is also claimed that the assessee is a senior citizen and having many age related ailments. It was only when assessee’s bank account was seized, the assessee came to know of the impugned orders.

Ld. Counsel has pointed out about the legal issue involved as to if at all notice under Section 143(2) was issued. We find that the appeal has been dismissed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, without any representation of the assessee and it is mentioned that notices were served to the assessee through ITBA Portal on registered e–mail. We find that the assessee in Form–35 had provided an e–mail ID, but had not indicated if notices have to be served by e–mail.

ITA No. 113/NAG/2026 (Diwakar Daulatrao Bhongade) 4. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the delay is filing the appeal before this Tribunal is condoned. Further as legal issues are not considered by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, and it is not coming up if notices were duly served on assessee, we restore the issues on facts as well as law to the files of Ld. CIT(A) to give afresh opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass an order afresh.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open Court on 15.06.2026 Sd/– Sd/– ANUBHAV SHARMA KHETTRA MOHAN ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Nagpur: Dated: 15/06/2026 Z.U, P.S

Copy to:

ITA No. 113/NAG/2026 (Diwakar Daulatrao Bhongade) 1. The Assessee 2. The Revenue 3. The Pr.CIT concerned. 4. The DR, ITAT, Nagpur 5. Guard file. By order

Sr.PS/PS ITAT, Nagpur

DIWAKAR DAULATRAO BHONGADE,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(1) NAGPUR, NAGPUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments