SHREE JAMNAGAR JILLA SAHAKARI DUDH UTPADAK SANGH LTD,JAMNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(6), JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

ITA 790/RJT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 September 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 38 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the delay of 18 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, finding the reasons provided in the affidavit to be convincing and constituting a reasonable and sufficient cause. On merits, the Tribunal noted that the assessee was not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead its case successfully before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) had not discussed the assessee's case on merits based on the available material, which was considered a violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) was directed to pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who was also permitted to submit further evidence. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) was set aside and the matter was remitted back for adjudication afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee was treated as allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shree Jamnagar Jilla Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Rajkot Bench, for Assessment Year 2018-19. The appeal was filed belatedly by 18 days. The assessee's earlier appeal before the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)] was dismissed due to a delay of 38 days. The assessee sought condonation of both delays, citing communication gaps between the assessee and its tax consultant. The revenue did not object to the condonation of these delays.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 18 days in filing the appeal before the ITAT, Rajkot, for AY 2018-19 should be condoned (Question of fact, turning on the sufficiency of reasons provided in the affidavit). 2. Whether the delay of 38 days in filing the appeal before the NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) should be condoned (Question of fact, turning on the sufficiency of reasons provided in the affidavit). Assessee's Contentions: - The delays in filing appeals before both the Tribunal (18 days) and the Ld. CIT(A) (38 days) were minor and occurred due to a communication gap between the assessee and its tax consultant. - These delays should be condoned in the interest of justice. - The assessee also sought to submit additional documents and evidences before the Ld. CIT(A) to prove its claim. Revenue's Contentions: - The Ld. DR for the Revenue did not raise any objection if the minor delays before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Tribunal were condoned and the matter was restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Shishir Kumar, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 30/07/2026Pronounced: 30/09/2026

Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year (AY) 2018-19, is directed against the order under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAC) Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)’], dated 03.02.2026, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 14

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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →