NOORUL HASAN SHAIKH,MUMBAI vs. ITO-WARD 25(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7206/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 March 2026AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the one-day delay in filing the appeal, considering the explanation provided by the assessee as a 'sufficient cause' in light of the death of their mother. The Tribunal emphasized the principle of advancing substantial justice over technicalities, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Land Acquisition Collector vs. Mst. Katiji & Others.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) for being filed beyond the prescribed limitation period. The assessee claimed a delay of one day, attributing it to the death of their mother and subsequent post-death ceremonies. The assessment order was served on the assessee on 21.10.2022, and the appeal was filed shortly thereafter.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiably condoned due to sufficient cause, and whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 148A,Section 148,Section 149,Section 151,Section 144,Section 56(2)(vii)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle H. Hariya – Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar (SR. DR.)
Hearing: 12.02.2026Pronounced: 10.03.2026

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 23.12.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2014-15. The following grounds are reproduced below:

“1. THE ORDER IS BAD IN LAW, ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT JURI ICTION

2

1.

1 In the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the appellate order u/s. 250 of the Income tax Act, 1961 ['the Act'] framed and passed on 30.09.2025 by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre ['Ld. CIT (A)'] is bad in law, ille

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 →