UMEDBHAI SHANKARBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(4), SURAT

ITA 193/SRT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 June 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a penalty order. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as belated by 57 days without providing a hearing to the assessee.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that dismissing the appeal without a hearing violates the principles of natural justice and Section 250(1) of the Income-tax Act. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal as belated without affording a hearing to the assessee. Whether the action of the CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(1),Section 271D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CA
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 18.06.2026Pronounced: 25.06.2026

Per B.M. Biyani, AM:

Feeling aggrieved by order of first appeal bearing DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1084971072(1) and dated 20.01.2026 [“impugned order”] passed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal)- NFAC, Delhi[“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of penalty-order dated 29.09.2025 passed by Assessment Unit of Income-tax Department [“Ld. AO”] imposing a penalty of Rs. 32,38,500/- u/s 271D of Income-tax Act, 1961 for UmedbhaiShankarbhai Patel Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2017-18, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds as mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).

2.

Heard the learned Representatives of both sides

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 271D

All 1,713 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271D →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →