ATIQ AHMAD,JHANSI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3)(2), JHANSI

ITA 417/AGR/2026Status: DisposedITAT Agra05 October 2026AY 2022-236 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee, Atiq Ahmad, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against an order dated 10.03.2026 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi. The appeal pertained to Assessment Year 2022-23. The first appeal before the CIT(A) was filed on 20.04.2024, approximately 14 days after the assessment order dated 07.03.2024, which was passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal, both for being time-barred due to insufficient cause for condoning the delay and on merits. The assessee is aggrieved by this dismissal.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal as time-barred without passing a speaking order and in proceeding to decide the appeal on merits after declining the prayer for condonation of delay. The Tribunal emphasized that the adjudication of a lis on merits is seminal to the justice dispensation system and that the issue of condonation of delay must be decided first. If the delay is condoned, the appeal can be decided on merits. If rejected, the proceedings automatically fail, and the appellate authority lacks jurisdiction to entertain a time-barred appeal without condoning the delay. The Supreme Court's observation in Union of India & Anr. v. Jahangir Byramji Jeejeebhoy (D) was cited, stating that while the length of delay is relevant, courts should not start with the merits of the main matter when considering condonation. The Tribunal condoned the nominal delay of approximately 14 days in filing the first appeal before the CIT(A) in the interest of substantial justice. Consequently, the matter was restored to the file of the CIT(A) to pass a fresh order on merits after considering the assessee's submissions, directing the assessee to be diligent and cooperative, and the Assessing Officer to observe principles of natural justice. The additions on merits were not decided by the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal as time-barred, and if so, whether the delay of approximately 14 days in filing the first appeal should be condoned under Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, considering the principle of substantial justice over technicalities. 2. Whether the CIT(A) erred in proceeding to decide the appeal on merits after declining the prayer for condonation of delay, which is contrary to established legal principles. Assessee's Contentions: - The delay in filing the first appeal was nominal (about 14 days) and should be condoned in the interest of substantial justice, as procedural technicalities should not deny the opportunity for a hearing on merits. - The CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order rejecting the condonation of delay. - The CIT(A) erred in confirming additions on merits, including Rs. 71,000/- under Section 69A based on an erroneous reading of the fund flow statement, Rs. 21,738/- as interest without appreciating evidence, and disallowing deduction under Section 80TTA for interest on savings accounts. Revenue's Contentions: - The judgment records no specific contentions from the Revenue regarding the delay or the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 249(2),Section 249(3),Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 69A,Section 80TTA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA(SMC

Before: SUNIL KUMAR SINGHBRAJESH KUMAR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Agarwal, CA
For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. (DR)
Hearing: 21.07.2026Pronounced: 21.07.2026

PER:BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 10.03.2026 passed in appeal No. NFAC/2021-22/10361068 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), NFAC, DELHI (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)) u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2022-23, wherein ld. CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal as time barred and on merits as well.

2.

At the very outset, without going on merits and after hearing the parties, it is noticed that first appeal was filed on 20.04.2024 against the assessment order dated 07.03.2024 passed 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act by a nominal delay of about 14 days. The lea

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 249(2)

All 621 judgments and leading authorities on Section 249(2) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →