YASIR NISAR WANI,SRINAGAR vs. ITO, SRINAGAR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the significant delay in filing the appeal in the interest of justice, imposing a token cost of Rs. 10,000/- on the assessee. However, since the CIT(A) order was passed without a proper adjudication on merits, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the first appellate authority to provide the assessee an opportunity to present their case with evidence.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) which was an ex-parte order as the assessee failed to appear. The assessee's appeal to the ITAT was filed belatedly by 1741 days, with reasons attributing the delay to being outside India, communication challenges due to Article 370 abrogation, COVID-19 lockdown, and issues with changing counsel.
What were the issues?
Whether the significant delay in filing the appeal can be condoned, and if so, whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication on merits given the ex-parte nature of the lower appellate order.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-1 Amritsar dated 26.03.2019 passed u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (henceforth the Act) which has emanated from the order of the ITO, W-3(3), Srinagar dated 30.03.2016
passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 Assessment Year: 2008-09
Condonation of delay: This appeal is filed belatedly by 1741 days (One
Thousand Seven Hundred and Forty-one days). The CIT(A) order is passed on 26th
March, 2019, and the appeal before the ITAT has been filed on 29th February, 2024. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaini
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.
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 148
- 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
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026