KRIPA SHANKER,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), PATNA

ITA 117/PAT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 November 2025AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding the assessee had a reasonable cause for the delay. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) erred by not deciding the case on merits and setting aside the order, restoring the appeal to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed late by 558 days. The assessee claimed the order was not served. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, stating the AO's order was self-speaking and required no interference.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without deciding on merits, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(2),Section 144,Section 54F,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 250(6),Section 250(1),Section 251(1),Section 46A

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 ‘SMC’ 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 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2014-15 dated 26.06.2023. 1. 1. The Registry has informed that the appeal is barred by limitation by 558 days. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay explaining the reasons that the order u/s 250 of the Act was never served upon the assessee nor on his e-mail and he was also not informed through SMS and, therefore, the appeal could not be filed in time. After perusing the same, we are satisfied

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 54F

All 2,628 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54F →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →