PARIKSHIT RAMESH FUKE ,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(2) NAGPUR, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 468/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 June 2026AY 2020-214 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee's explanation for the delay, arising from personal circumstances, deserved consideration. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s orders and restored the issues to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the CIT(A) with significant delays, which were not condoned. The assessee cited the serious illness and subsequent death of his brother as the reason for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) should be condoned due to personal circumstances, and if so, whether the matters should be restored for fresh adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 271AAC(1),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Jain, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR
Hearing: 11.06.2026Pronounced: 12.06.2026

PER BENCH:

These appeals filed by the same assessee are directed against the separate orders of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (for short, “CIT(A)”), dated 08/07/2025 & 13/08/2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21.

ITA No. 468 & 662/NAG/2025 (Parikshit Ramesh Fuke) 2. On hearing both the sides, we find that the impugned order in ITA No. 468/NAG/2025 arises out of dismissal of appeal against the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) and ITA No.662/NAG/2025 arises out of penalty proceedings initiated u/s. 271AAC(1) of the Act.

3.

There was a delay of 651 days in filing the appeal before the Ld.First Appellate Authority (FAA) while challenging the assessment order and 481 days while filing the penalty order and the same has not been condoned by the NFAC. Learned counsel has drawn our attention to order in assessee’s own case of Coordinate Bench in ITA No. 393/NAG/2025 for AY 2018-19 dated 26.02.2026, wherein on similar facts and circumstances, the issues on merits have been restored to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO).

4.

On perusal of the impugned orders, we find that assessee had taken a plea that his brother was seriously ill and subsequently passed away on 09.09.2022. Owing to the said circumstances, the assessee could not effectively pursue the proceedings.

ITA No. 468 & 662/NAG/2025 (Parikshit Ramesh Fuke) 5. We find that this fact has not been disputed by NFAC, but relying on various case-laws, delay was not condoned. However, to our mind such explanation arising out of personal circumstances deserves reasonable consideration.

6.

In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we deem it appropriate to restore the issues to the files of NFAC for fresh adjudication on merits as well as question of law after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, the impugned orders are set aside and the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee 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 vr/-

ITA No. 468 & 662/NAG/2025 (Parikshit Ramesh Fuke)

Copy to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Revenue 3. The Pr.CIT concerned. 4. The DR, ITAT, Nagpur 5. Guard file. By order Vukkem Digitally signed by Vukkem Rambabu Rambabu Date: 2026.06.15 10:32:45 +05'30' Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur

More judgments on Section 271AAC(1)

All 1,211 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271AAC(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →