CHANDAN DEKA,GUWAHATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 1(1), GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 203/GTY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati09 June 2026AY 2020-214 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals, acknowledging the liberal approach for sufficient cause. It found that the lower authorities' orders were ex-parte and lacked a decision on all grounds, thus restoring the issue for de-novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the ITAT with a significant delay, citing medical treatment and financial constraints. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders without deciding all grounds of appeal on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeals should be condoned and if ex-parte orders passed by lower authorities without deciding all grounds on merits are valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH

For Appellant: Shri Nihar Sahu, CA
For Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Add. CIT
Hearing: 04.06.2026Pronounced: 09.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH (VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA)

SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA Nos.202 & 203/GTY/2026 Assessment Years: 2019-20 & 2020-21

Chandan Deka Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Guwahati 14 Amrit Nagar, Basishtha Assam-781005 Charaili, Beltola, Guwahati Assam-781028 [PAN: AGCPD8925F] APPELLANT RESPONDENT

Appellant by : Shri Nihar Sahu, CA Respondent by : Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Add. CIT

Date of hearing : 04.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 09.06.2026

O R D E R PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER These appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders of the NFAC, Delhi [“the Ld. CIT(A)”, for short], dated 21.10.2025 & 05.01.2026 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the assessment years 2019-20 & 2020-21 respectively. 2. Since both the appeals pertain to the same assessee and involve interconnected issues, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed by this common order.

ITA Nos.202 &203/GTY/2026 Chandan Deka; A.Y: 2019-20 &2020-21 3. There is a delay of 108 & 18 days respectively in filing the captioned appeals. The assessee filed applications along with affidavit for condonation of delay in filing the appeals. The assessee contended in the applications for condonation of delay, that assessee has taken medical treatment for his ailment and also due to financial constraint, the appeals could not be filed on time before this Tribunal. Thus, the Ld. AR sought for condoning the delay in filing the appeals. 4. The Ld. DR submitted that, there is no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay, thus sought for dismissal of the present appeals on delay in latches.

5.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 108 & 18 days respectively in filing the captioned appeals.

6.

Brief facts of the case are that, assessment orders came to be passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act on 19.05.2024 for A.Y 2019-20

2 | P a g e

ITA Nos.202 &203/GTY/2026 Chandan Deka; A.Y: 2019-20 &2020-21 and for AY 2020-21 on 12.03.2025 by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment orders mentioned above, assessee preferred appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide orders impugned dated 21.10.2025 & 05.01.2026, dismissed the first appeals filed by the assessee. As against the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 21.10.2025 & 05.01.2026, assessee filed the present appeals.

7.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the orders of the Assessing Officer as well as Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte and the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the grounds of the appeals of the assessee and the orders impugned came to be passed in violation of principals of natural justice. Thus, sought for allowing the appeals.

8.

Per contra, the Ld. DR submitted that the assessee is a habitual defaulter who has not appeared before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the respective orders in accordance with law which requires nointerference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the appeals.

9.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the orders of the Assessing Officer as well as orders of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, wherein the assessee has not participated in any of the proceedings. Even the Ld. CIT(A) has not

3 | P a g e

ITA Nos.202 &203/GTY/2026 Chandan Deka; A.Y: 2019-20 &2020-21 decided all the grounds of appeal on its merits. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the files of the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessments. Needless to say, the Assessing Officer shall provide opportunity of being heard to the assessee before passing the assessment order in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail.

10.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 09.06.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RAKESH MISHRA) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 09.06.2026 DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR)

//TRUE COPY//

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA

4 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →