MITHUN BABU PRASAD JAISWAL,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-8(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 66/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 September 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdia (Accountant Member)9 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the 110-day delay, finding a reasonable cause based on the assessee's affidavit and corroborating evidence of bank account attachment. Recognizing that both the AO and CIT(A) orders were passed without the assessee's full participation due to communication issues and the pandemic, the ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after verifying the additional evidence filed by the assessee and providing a proper opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order (dated 10/07/2024 for AY 2017-18) with a delay of 110 days. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal for non-appearance and lack of evidence. The assessee explained the delay was due to the order not being physically served, email registered with CA, and unawareness until the bank account was attached by the AO u/s 226(3). The original assessment was completed ex-parte u/s 144, with additions for estimated profit and unexplained money u/s 69A.

What were the issues?

Condonation of delay in filing appeal; validity of ex-parte assessment and appeal dismissal by CIT(A); proper opportunity for the assessee to present evidence before authorities; additions made by AO under Section 144 and Section 69A.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 226(3),Section 69A,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ DB-B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad

Before: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

Hearing: 11/09/2025

Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10/07/2024 of the learned CIT (A)-NFAC Delhi, for the A.Y.2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 110 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has filed an application/affidavit for condonation of delay. The learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee is an individual and deriving income from distribution of Parle Agro and Nourishco beverages. The impugned order passed by the learned CIT (A) NFAC Delhi was ITA No 66 of 2025

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.

More judgments on Section 226(3)

All 95 judgments and leading authorities on Section 226(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →