MOHAMAD MERAJ ALAM,ARARIA vs. ITO WARD 3(1), PURNIA, PURNIA

ITA 217/PAT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Patna05 June 2026AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the delay of 620 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) after considering the reasons provided. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) which was delayed by 620 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay, finding the reasons insufficient. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and whether the appeal should be decided on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 271(1)(c),Section 249

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA BENCH, PATNA

For Appellant: Shri Brajendra Kumar, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Mingma Sherpa, Sr. DR
Hearing: 01.06.2026Pronounced: 05.06.2026

PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)m, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 07.11.2025, DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-

2 Mohamad Meraj Alam 26/1082390336(1) challenging the exparte order for not condoning the delay of 620 days by the Ld. CIT(A) and not decide the issue on merit.

2.

At the outset of hearing, we noted that the appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 56 days. In this regard, the asse

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →