JNMC SERVICES,KARIMNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-2, KARIMNAGAR

ITA 1214/HYD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 October 2026AY 2022-234 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the interests of justice would be better served by granting the assessee an opportunity to present its case before the Ld. CIT(A). The Tribunal noted that the Ld. CIT(A)'s rejection of the condonation application was brief and lacked detailed consideration of the reasons provided by the assessee. The Tribunal condoned the delay of 137 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), subject to the assessee depositing a cost of Rs. 5,000/- with the Prime Minister Relief Fund. The impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication on merits. The assessee was granted the liberty to raise all legal and factual grounds before the Ld. CIT(A), who was directed to decide the appeal in accordance with the law after due consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee, JNMC Services, filed an appeal before the ITAT, Hyderabad Bench, challenging the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (Ld. CIT(A)) dated 09/03/2026 for Assessment Year 2022-23. The appeal before the ITAT arose because the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal for condonation of a 137-day delay. The assessee's counsel argued that the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the condonation application summarily without discussing the reasons provided. The assessee also claimed to have furnished requisite details regarding cash deposits, which were allegedly not considered. The delay was attributed to the partners' unfamiliarity with online appeal procedures and non-receipt of assessment orders and notices sent via email. The revenue, represented by the Ld. DR, relied on the findings of the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the assessee's application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal, without adequately considering the reasons provided by the assessee? (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the condonation application in a single line without discussing the reasons furnished. The assessee claimed the delay was due to a lack of awareness of online filing procedures and non-receipt of notices, and that they had a strong case on merits, deserving an opportunity to be heard. They relied on the principle that justice would be served by allowing them to present their case. Revenue's Contention: The Ld. DR relied upon the findings of the lower authorities, implying support for the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision to dismiss the condonation application.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, HON’BLE

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal has been appeal preferred by the assessee firm against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 09/03/2026 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee firm has invited our attention to the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) to submit that there was a delay o

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 →