SOMRI DEVI,GRAM PIPARIYA, PO- PIPARIYA, LAKHISARAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(5),LAKHISARAI, ITO COURT AREA, JAMUI ROAD

ITA 424/PAT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Patna16 October 2026AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 1131 days in filing the appeal, considering the reasons provided by the assessee in her affidavit. On the substantive issue, the Tribunal found that the matter was decided against the assessee in an ex-parte manner. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the impugned assessment order and restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer was directed to frame a fresh assessment as per law after affording necessary opportunity to the assessee to present her case. The ratio decidendi is that where an assessment is made ex-parte and the assessee demonstrates a genuine need for an opportunity to present their case, the appellate authorities should provide such an opportunity in the interest of justice. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Somri Devi, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Patna Bench, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi, for Assessment Year 2015-16. The appeal was filed with a delay of 1131 days, which the Tribunal condoned. The assessee contended that the matter was decided ex-parte by both the lower authorities and sought an opportunity to present details and explanations to the Assessing Officer. The Revenue argued that adequate opportunities were provided and not availed by the assessee, thus requesting the upholding of the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee's appeal is barred by limitation, and if so, whether the delay should be condoned? (Question of fact and law). The assessee sought condonation of delay based on reasons provided in an affidavit. The revenue did not explicitly argue on this point, but their overall submission implies upholding the lower authority's order. 2. Whether the matter should be set aside and restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment, considering the assessee's claim of ex-parte decisions and request for an opportunity to present details? (Question of mixed law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). The assessee argued for a fresh opportunity before the Assessing Officer. The revenue contended that adequate opportunities were already given and requested the upholding of the CIT(A)'s order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH: PATNA

Before: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Gopalan Gurusamy

Per Gopalan Gurusamy, AM:

This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] passed u/s 250 of the Act dated 27.02.2023 for the AY 2015-16, vide Appeal No. NFAC/2014- 15/10073432. 2 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Somri Devi

2.

At the outset, we note that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 1131 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition along with an affidavit requesting to condone the delay in the filing of the appeal. Considering the reasons given in the af

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 →