RAKESH RATANLAL JAISWAL,YAVATMAL vs. ITO WARD - 1, YAVATMAL, YAVATMAL
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the reasons provided for the delay, such as a mother's illness, were not sufficient without supporting evidence. Consequently, the appeals were allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the assessee paying costs.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2022-23 and 2023-24. The appeals suffered from substantial delays ranging from 265 to 656 days.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the substantial delay in filing the appeals and whether the reasons provided constituted a sufficient cause. The Tribunal also considered the restoration of issues to the AO for fresh assessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR
Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI KHETTRA MOHAN ROY
PER BENCH:
These appeals filed by the same assessee are directed against the separate orders of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (for short, “CIT(A)”), all dated 20/02/2026 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) for the Assessment Years (AY) 2022-23, 2022- 23 & 2023-24 respectively.
ITA Nos. 451, 452 & 454/NAG/2026 (Rakesh Ratanlal Jaiswal)
Appeals were heard together and we find that appeals ITA Nos.451 & 454/NAG/2026 arises out of assessments concluded u/s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act for AYs 2022-23 & 2023-24 while ITA No.452/NAG/2026 pertains to penalty imposed u/s. 270A in AY 2022-23. 3. On hearing both
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.
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 144B
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026