RAKESH KUMAR GUPTA,THRISSUR vs. ITO WARD 2(1), THRISSUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, noting the assessee's claim of ignorance of the CIT(A)'s order. It was held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without disposing it on merits, as required by law.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an individual dealing in spices, filed a return for AY 2014-15. Based on information of substantial cash deposits, the AO initiated reassessment proceedings u/s 148 and later passed a best judgment assessment u/s 147, taxing the entire cash deposits as unexplained income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-prosecution.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on merits, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 148,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 250(6),Section 221
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- PCIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra132 citing279 CTR 614 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM
Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) dated 19th, 20th& 21st March, 2025 and 2nd February, 2025 for Assessment Years (AY) 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 &2018-19, respectively.
Since identical issues and facts are involved in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.
2 Rakesh Kumar Gupta
For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to the appeal bearing ITA No. 680/Coch/2023 for AY 2014-15 are stated herein.
Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual engage
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 →- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026