AJAY KUMAR JAIN,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 43(1), KOLKATA

ITA 2184/KOL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 October 2026AY 2019-20204 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 54 days in filing the first appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Tribunal reasoned that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently held that delay in filing appeals, when supported by justifiable reasons and beyond the control of the assessee, should be looked into liberally to ensure substantial justice. The reasons provided by the assessee, including the medical ailment of the assessee's child preventing timely checking of emails and the subsequent discovery of the assessment order, were considered sufficient cause. The Tribunal relied on the principles laid down in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a de-novo assessment. The Tribunal also directed that the assessee be provided with an opportunity of being heard before passing the de-novo assessment order. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Ajay Kumar Jain, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) 'A' Bench, Kolkata, against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (Ld. CIT(A)) dated 25.02.2026 for Assessment Year 2019-20. There was a delay of 46 days in filing this appeal before the ITAT, which was condoned. The original assessment order was passed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward-43(1), Kolkata, on 06.03.2024 under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, making certain additions. The assessee had appealed this assessment order before the Ld. CIT(A), but this appeal was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) on 25.02.2026. The primary reason for dismissal by the Ld. CIT(A) was a delay of 54 days in filing the appeal before it, which the Ld. CIT(A) did not condone.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 54 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was sufficiently explained and ought to have been condoned, thereby allowing the appeal on merits? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and condonation of delay). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the Ld. CIT(A) did not decide all grounds of appeal and passed an ex-parte order in violation of the principles of natural justice. The assessee also provided reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), including the assessee's child suffering from medical ailments, leading to non-checking of emails, and the subsequent discovery of the assessment order on the income tax portal by the accountant. The assessee relied on the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) for liberal interpretation of delay condonation. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that there was no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay of 54 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), and therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on grounds of delay and latches.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, AR
For Respondent: Shri Kalyan Kumar Das, Sr. DR
Hearing: 05.10.2026Pronounced: 08.10.2026

PER YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER:

The present Appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the NFAC, Delhi ‘Ld. CIT(A)’ for short) dated 25.02.2026, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) for the Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. There is a delay of 46 days in filing the present Appeal. Assessee filed an application for condonation of delay explaining the cause for the delay. For the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay, the delay of 46 days in filing the present Appeal is hereby condoned. Ajay Kumar Jain; A.Y: 2019-20

3.

Brief facts of the case are that, an Assessment Order came to be passed u/s 147 r.w.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.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →