ABHAY KUMAR GOHIL,BHOPAL vs. DCIT/ACIT,5(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

ITA 407/IND/2025Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 June 2026AY 2016-174 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 525 days, citing the assessee should not be penalized for the advocate's mistake and adopting a liberal approach. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, setting aside the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 525 days due to the non-cooperation of their advocate/chartered accountant. The assessee, a retired judge, had evidence for a gift of Rs. 5,00,000/- from family members, but these were not submitted to the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned due to the advocate's negligence, and whether the matter should be restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shree Paresh M. Joshi

For Appellant: Shri Pavan Ved, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 19/06/2026Pronounced: 24/06/2026

Per, Bench: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2016-17, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), dated 29.12.2023, which in turn arises out of a penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, on 17.09.2022. 2. The appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2016-17, is barred by limitation by 525 days, before this Tribunal. The assessee has moved a petiti

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 →