AMIT DAS,HOJAI, ASSAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-NAGAON, NAGAON

ITA 352/GTY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 March 2026AY 2018-193 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 470 days in filing the appeal, finding the reasons to be bonafide and genuine, and admitted the appeal for adjudication. The Tribunal observed that the impugned order passed by the NFAC was upheld by the learned CIT(A) without looking into the merits of the case, by simply dismissing the appeal of the assessee. In the interest of justice and fairness to both parties, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the learned CIT(A) for necessary re-adjudication. The assessee was directed to be provided with a reasonable opportunity to present their case, and it was further clarified that the assessee should not seek adjournments unless required for a reasonable cause. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Amit Das, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against an order dated 28.12.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), which was upheld by the learned CIT(A). The appeal was filed with a delay of 470 days. The assessee's counsel argued that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without considering the assessee's contentions or deciding the issues on merit. The revenue's counsel did not object to the assessee's prayer. The ITAT noted the delay and, finding the reasons to be bonafide and genuine, condoned it and admitted the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation, and if so, whether the delay should be condoned? (Question of procedure turning on general principles of justice and fairness). Assessee's Contention: The delay in filing the appeal was due to bonafide and genuine reasons, and the appeal should be admitted. The learned Authorized Representative further argued that the impugned order was passed by the learned CIT(A) without considering the assessee's contentions or deciding the issues on merit, and therefore, the appeal may be set aside to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing a proper opportunity to the assessee. Revenue's Contention: The learned Departmental Representative did not object to the prayer made by the assessee for condoning the delay and remanding the matter.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GAUHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI

Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Debnath, AR

For Respondent: Shri Diipak Singh, DR

Hearing: 09.03.2026Pronounced: 13.03.2026

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 28.12.2023 for the AY 2018-19.

At the outset, we note that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 470 days. At the time of hearing, the counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld.

D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and, hence, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.

The learned Authorized Representative of the assessee stated that the impugned order was passed by learned CIT (A), dismissing the appeal, without considering the contention of the assessee, without deciding the issues on the merit of the case. Therefore, instant appeal may be set aside to the file of the CIT (A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after giving proper opportunity to the assessee to present his case before learned CIT (A) and adjudicate the matter on the merits of the case.

On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative did not object to such prayer made by the assessee before the Bench.

We after hearing the submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, we find that impugned order passed by NFAC was upheld by the ld. CIT(A) without looking into the merits of the case by simply dismissing the appeal of the assessee. We therefore, feel it necessary and in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, to restore the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT (A) for necessary re-adjudication for which reasonable opportunity to be provided to the assessee. It is further clarify that assessee should also not seek any adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 13.03.2026.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →