What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Due to the assessee's failure to represent their case before the lower authorities, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 7 days, which was condoned. The assessee had failed to represent their case before the lower authorities despite multiple opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the case should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication due to the assessee's non-representation.

Mohammed Ajmal, Ramnagara vs ITO | ITAT Bangalore 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

For Appellant: Ms. Harsha, A.R

Hearing: 08.04.2026Pronounced: 30.06.2026

PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 7.11.2025 vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1082391475 (1) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) for the assessment year 2021-22.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

ITA No.499/Bang/2026 Mohammed Ajmal, Ramnagara Page 2 of 5

ITA No.499/Bang/2026 Mohammed Ajmal, Ramnagara Page 3 of 5

At the outset, the ld. A.R. of the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 7 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The ld. A.R. of the assessee also drew our attention on an application for condonation of delay dated 5.2.2026 along with an affidavit in original sworn before the notary public dated 7.2.2026 stating the reason for the short delay of 7 days.

3.1. Perused the record and having heard learned counsel for the assessee and ld. D.R., it is perceived that the explanation offered in the condonation application is plausible and “sufficient cause” has been shown by the assessee, which prevented him from filing the

ITA No.499/Bang/2026 Mohammed Ajmal, Ramnagara Page 4 of 5 appeal within the specified period before this Tribunal, and accordingly, we are inclined to condone the short delay of 7 days in filing the appeal before us.

Now having condoned the delay in filing the appeal, before us both the parties fairly conceded that assesse could not represent his case before both the authorities below and accordingly the ld. A.R. of the assessee prayed that one more opportunity may be granted before the ld. AO. The ld. D.R. although fairly conceded that assessee could not represent his case before both the authorities below, however, submitted that some cost may be levied owing to the negligence shown by the assessee before both the authorities below.

4.1 On perusal of the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, we observed that the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC had provided 6 numbers of opportunities to the assessee to make his submission in support of the grounds of appeal, however, the assessee did not file any submissions/response before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. On perusal of the assessment order, we also observed that assessee could only made part compliances in support of his claim. This being so, in the interest of justice, equity and fair play and as requested by the ld. A.R. of the assessee we deem it fit and proper to remit the entire issue in dispute to the file of ld. AO to decide afresh in accordance with law.

4.2 While remitting the matter to the file of ld. AO, we also consider it necessary to impose a token cost of Rs.2,000/- to the assessee in aggregate owing to the negligence shown to the statutory notices before both the authorities below. The assessee shall deposit the cost warranted in favour of Prime Minister Relief Fund and the receipt thereof shall be furnished before the ld. AO. With these terms, the appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of ld. AO for de-novo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to say, a reasonable

ITA No.499/Bang/2026 Mohammed Ajmal, Ramnagara Page 5 of 5 opportunity of being heard must be granted to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to produce all the relevant document/records/submissions/information in support of his claim. We make it clear that in case of further default, the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency. It is ordered accordingly.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30th June, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Waseem Ahmed) (Keshav Dubey) Accountant Member Judicial Member

Bangalore, Dated 30th June, 2026. VG/SPS

Copy to:

The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 5 Guard file By order

Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore.

MOHAMMED AJMAL,RAMNAGARA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAMNAGARA, RAMNAGARA

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