ANCY THOMAS,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(3), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2415/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 August 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A) by holding that the assessee had shown sufficient cause. The Tribunal then remitted the matters back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the CIT(A) with significant delays ranging from 402 to 582 days. The CIT(A) dismissed these appeals without condoning the delay and without adjudicating on the merits of the case.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) was justifiable, and whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals without considering the merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 270A,Section 271AAC(1),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri Sachin P. Kumar
For Respondent: Shri Mithun Shete &, Shri Rajesh Haladkar
Hearing: 04.08.2026Pronounced: 24.08.2026

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “A” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5.

आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

// True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →