JIA MONGRI SANGMA,NONGALBIRA vs. ITO, SHILLONG

PDF · subscribers
ITA 442/GTY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 March 2026AY 2021-22Bench: SHRIDUVVURU RL REDDY (Vice President), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the 312-day delay, finding the reasons genuine and bona fide. The quantum appeal was restored to the AO for a decision on merits, and the penalty appeals were quashed as their foundation was gone, with liberty to the AO to re-initiate penalty proceedings if required.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s order dismissing the appeal in limine due to a 312-day delay was presented. The assessee claimed the delay was due to bona fide and genuine reasons, and that the CIT(A)'s decision violated principles of natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable, and if so, whether the penalties levied were sustainable without a valid assessment order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271,Section 270A,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘GAUHATI BENCH’, GUWAHATI

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

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Sarma, AR
For Respondent: Shri Dipak Singh, DR
Hearing: 12.03.2026Pronounced: 13.03.2026

These are appeals preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”]even dated 30.10.2025 for the AY 2021-22. The penalties were levied u/s 271 AAC(i) & 270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment has been framed by the ld. AO u/s 144/ 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) vide order dated 23.12.2022, when the assessee

3.

The learned DR on the other hand did not object for the same.

4.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the order has been passed by ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal in Limine without condoning the delay of 312 days. As we found the reasons to be genuine and bona fide, therefore, condoning the same, we restore the appeal to the file of the Learned AO with a direction to decide the same on merit, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

& 443/GTY/2025 5. Since we have already restored the assessment order while adjudicating the quantum appeal of the assessee in therefore, the penalties levied by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) would also stand quashed as the very foundation of levy of penalties in the case of the assessee would not mo survive. Further, the ld. AO is given the liberty to re- initiate the penalty proceedings afresh, if required.

Order pronounced on 13.03.2026.

More judgments on Section 271

All 211 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →