SHAMBHU DAYAL MISHRA,FARRUKHABAD vs. ITO WARD 4(2)(2) FARRUKHABAD, FARRUKHABAD

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH ‘SMC’ : AGRA BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.146//AGR/2026 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2017-18) Shambhu Dayal Mishra, vs. ITO, Ward 4(2)(2), Mali Gali, Near Shitla Mata Dham, Farrukhabad. Barhpur, Farrukhabad – 209 625 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : CAVPM8753P) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Pankaj Gargh, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Harsh Siddharth Gautam, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 23.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 16.06.2026 O R D E R 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 20.12.2023 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 24 months in filing the appeal. He submitted that the condonation of delay application is filed along with affidavit of Shri Kamal Dixit, Advocate who was looking after income-tax matter of the assessee and he submitted in the affidavit that at the time of registration of the assessee by his staff member on the income-tax portal, by mistake email id registered was of his daughter and

2 ITA No.146/Agr/2026

hence, the notices/order on the portal could not be seen. It is further submitted that on receipt of the demand notice dated 02.02.2026 from the Income-tax Department, he downloaded the ld. CIT (A)’s order on the same date and on the same date, he handed over the appellate order to the assessee. Accordingly, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the delay caused due to the reason beyond the control of the assessee. He further submitted that it is settled position of law that where the delay was bonafide and there is sufficient cause for delay in filing appeal, the delay must be condoned by the appellate authority when it is necessary for rendering the substantial justice to the assessee. Accordingly, he pleaded to condone the delay. 3. On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue objected to the submissions of the ld. AR of the assessee stating that there is abnormal delay in filing the appeal. 4. Heard both the counsels on the issue of condonation of delay. In my considered opinion, there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, I condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, it was observed that that there is no compliance before the ld. CIT (A) who decided the issue against the assessee by observing that assessee has not pursued the appeal despite being granted several opportunities and the details are given in the first appellate order, accordingly, dismissed the appeal. It is observed that ld. CIT (A) has not decided the issue on merit and affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer who has also passed the order ex- parte. Ld. DR of the Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

3 ITA No.146/Agr/2026

Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 16.06.2026 TS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, AGRA