NAUGAON BAHUUDESIYA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED,UTTARKASHI vs. DCIT/ ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the reasons provided by the assessee for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) constituted a sufficient cause. Consequently, the delay was condoned. As the Ld. CIT(A) had not adjudicated the appeal on its merits, the Tribunal restored all issues to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) was directed to decide the issues on merits after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee was also directed to participate in the appellate proceedings and file necessary replies within the time stipulated by the Ld. CIT(A). The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Naugaon Bahuudesiya Sahkari Samiti Ltd., filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) challenging an order dated 16.05.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi. This order arose from an assessment order dated 13.03.2024 passed under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The Ld. CIT(A) had not admitted the assessee's appeal because it was filed beyond the prescribed time limit. The assessee attributed the delay to the lack of technical knowledge of tax laws among its office bearers and the absence of a full-time accountant or tax advisor. Despite five notices, the assessee failed to make any compliance before the Ld. CIT(A).
What were the issues?
1. Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2016-17 is liable to be condoned under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, considering the reasons provided by the assessee? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was due to a reasonable cause, namely, the lack of technical knowledge of tax laws among its office bearers and the absence of a full-time accountant or tax advisor. Therefore, the delay should be condoned, and the appeal should be decided on merits. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific contention from the revenue regarding the delay condonation or the merits of the case before the Ld. CIT(A).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN “SMC” BENCH: DEHRADUN
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
ORDER PER BENCH: The present appeal is filed by assessee against the order dated 16.05.2025 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), NFAC, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] arising out of assessment order dated 13.03.2024 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2016-17.
From the perusal of the appellate order, it is found that ld. CIT(A) has not admitted the appeal as the appeal was filed delayed before the Ld. CIT(A). The reasons given in delay condonation petition was that the office bearers of the society do not have technical knowledge of tax laws and society does not have a full time Accountant/Tax Advisor. Therefore, the appeal was filed delayed before the Ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee has reasonable cause for delay in filing the appeal, therefore, it was prayed before the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay and decide the appeal on merits. Further, it is observed that despite of issue of five notices, assessee has failed to make any compliance before the Ld. CIT(A).
Under these circumstances, in our considered opinion the reason given by the assessee for delay has sufficient cause thus the delay in filing the appeal before ld. CIT(A) is hereby condoned. As the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee on merits, therefore, all the issues are restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same on merits after providing reasonable opportunities of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to participate in the appellate proceedings and filed the necessary replies within the time limit provided by the Ld. CIT(A). With these directions, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 13.03.2026.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
