RAJ KUMAR SINGH ,PATNA vs. ITO,WARD-6(4),PATNA , PATNA

ITA 341/PAT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 December 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, which is not empowered by law according to case precedents. The Tribunal also observed that proper representation was not made by the assessee at both the AO and CIT(A) stages. Considering the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to provide one more opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) confirming the assessment order, which was made ex-parte due to non-prosecution. The assessee had entered into a land development agreement, and the Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 after the assessee failed to file a return. The AO assessed the total income at ₹77,72,460/-, including capital gains, and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution, and if the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 144,Section 147,Section 148,Section 53A,Section 2(47)(v),Section 45,Section 48,Section 250(6),Section 250(1),Section 251(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA ‘DB’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2016-17 dated 07.10.2024. 1.1 The Registry has informed that there is a delay of 224 days in filing of this appeal, which has been requested to be condoned by the assessee by an application for condonation of delay as under:

“Most respectfully the petitioner be get to stay as under; The impugned assessment order was served on the appeal by 07-10-2024, limitation for filing the appeal was upto 0

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 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →