LAXMI ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES (BHOPAL) PRIVATE LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. ITO-5(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

ITA 826/IND/2025Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 September 2026AY 2018-196 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the ld. CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order dismissing the appeal in limine for being barred by limitation, without deciding the appeal on merits. The Tribunal considered the affidavit filed by the assessee, which explained the delay. It was noted that after excluding the COVID-19 period as per the Supreme Court's order, the delay was 553 days. The Tribunal found that the delay occurred due to the bona fide prosecution of a remedy before the Hon'ble M.P. High Court under a genuine belief, particularly in contesting a huge demand raised by the AO via a writ petition. The Tribunal concluded that there was no mala fide intention in filing the appeal belatedly. Citing the ratio in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Ors vs. Mst. Matiji & Ors (1987) 2 SCC 107, the Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) and remanded the matter to the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, with a direction to provide a sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The Tribunal clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the additions or penalty, leaving all issues for fresh adjudication. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Laxmi Engineering Industries Pvt. Ltd., filed two appeals (ITA No. 826 & 827/Ind/2025) before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Indore Bench, against orders dated 27.07.2025 and 31.07.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (referred to as the ld. CIT(A)). These orders arose from assessment orders framed under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The appeals before the ITAT were filed after a significant delay. The ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeals in limine due to this delay, without deciding them on merits. The assessee contended that the delay was caused by bona fide reasons, including the period of COVID-19 as per Supreme Court orders and the pendency of a writ petition before the Hon'ble M.P. High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in ex-parte dismissing the assessee's appeal without deciding it on merits, and whether a fair and meaningful opportunity was provided to the assessee to present its case, turning on the principles of natural justice and the procedure under section 250(6) of the Act. 2. Whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in not allowing the condonation of delay in filing the appeal, considering the period of COVID-19 and the pendency of a writ petition before the Hon'ble M.P. High Court, and whether the delay was bona fide and beyond the assessee's control. Assessee's Contentions: - The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte without a fair opportunity and without deciding on merits. - The delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) was due to bona fide and reasonable circumstances beyond the assessee's control, including the period of COVID-19 (15.03.2020 to 30.05.2022) as per the Supreme Court's order, which reduced the delay to 553 days. - The delay was also attributed to contesting the AO's order before the Hon'ble M.P. High Court via writ petition no. 15294 of 2021, which was decided on 28.11.2023, after which the appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A) without further delay. - Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court order in Cour on its Own Motion Civil Application No.3 of 2020. Revenue's Contentions: - The assessee was required to be vigilant. - The assessee had not filed an application for condonation of delay with the CIT(A). - The revenue strongly objected to the matter being restored after six years.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 250(6),Section 271AAC(1),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI & SHRI ARVIND SONI

For Appellant: Shri J.R. Bhatta, AR
For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, CIT-DR
Hearing: 09.09.2026Pronounced: 24.09.2026

PER BENCH:

Both appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order dated 27.07.2025 & 31.07.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as "the ld. CIT(A)"] for Assessment Year 2018-19 arising out of assessment order framed under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act").

Laxmi Engineering Industries Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 826 & 827/Ind/2025

2.

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in ITANo.827/Ind/2025:

“1.The Id CIT(A) was not justified in ex-parte dismissing the appeal of the appellant, without deciding the appeal on merits, and

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 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →