What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay, considering the assessee's age and medical condition. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing on merits and law.

The assessee filed appeals with a significant delay of approximately 11 months for assessment years 2014-15 to 2016-17. The assessee cited severe cervical neck medical issues as the reason for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals should be condoned based on the assessee's medical condition and age, allowing for a hearing on merits.

Gopal Tukaram Bitode, Madhav… vs Income Tax Office Ward-1, Akola… | s.250 | ITAT Nagpur 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY

For Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar, CIT DR

Hearing: 10.06.2026Pronounced: 12.06.2026

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/(for short, “CIT(A)”), dated 17/12/2024, 24/12/2024, 17/12/2024, 24/12/2024, 09/12/2024, & 18/12/2024 respectively passed

ITA Nos. 373 to 378/NAG/2025 (Gopal Tukaram Bitode) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) for the Assessment Years (AYs) 2014-15 to 2016-17 respectively.

At the time of hearing, an adjournment application was filed on behalf of the assessee, but on going through the record, we find no reasons to adjourn the case and accordingly, application was dismissed and the contentions of both the sides were heard.

It comes up on perusal of the impugned orders that amongst other grounds on merits and legal ground, assessee has raised grounds that the assessee was not given adequate opportunity of hearing by Ld. First Appellate Authority and in fact, we find that the appeals were dismissed as there was delay in filing of the appeals. We observe that there is a delay of around 11 months in all the Assessment Years involved.

Ld. DR has submitted that the explanation given before Ld. CIT(A) was not sufficient and the delay was rightly not condoned. However, on going through the impugned order, we find that in Form 35, assesse had mentioned that there is

ITA Nos. 373 to 378/NAG/2025 (Gopal Tukaram Bitode) a delay in filing of the appeals and the grounds for condonation of delay will be submitted at the time of hearing. A copy of affidavit is on record which shows that the assessee has claimed to be suffering from severe cervical neck related medical issues and due to deteriorating health, assessee could not contest the cases, however in the impugned order, we find that National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, has merely considered various judicial decisions holding that there was deliberate delay on the part of the assessee, thereby declining to condone the delay.

However, the reasons cited have not been otherwise doubted for their factual inaccuracy. In case of assessee, who is an individual and an old age, it is justified to condone the delay by accepting the reasons stated in the condonation application generously, so as to give opportunity to the assessee to contest the case on merits.

We allow the appeals of the assessee for statistical purposes and the issues on merits as well as law are restored

ITA Nos. 373 to 378/NAG/2025 (Gopal Tukaram Bitode) to the files of Ld. CIT(A) to give afresh opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass an order afresh

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open Court on 12.06.2026 Sd/– Sd/– ANUBHAV SHARMA KHETTRA MOHAN ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Nagpur: Dated: 12/06/2026 Z.U, P.S Copy to: 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

GOPAL TUKARAM BITODE,MADHAV NAGAR ,LAKHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD-1, AKOLA, ITO BUILDING,AKOLA

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