SAROJ DEVI,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (4), PATNA

ITA 242/PAT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 September 2025AY 2016-17Bench: the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi through an advocate. The appellant may mention here that he is barely computer conversant and depends on advocate for income tax matters. 5. That the appellant states that after filing the appeal he was assured that he would receive a notice. The appellant for the purpose of this also made necessary enquiries from his previous counsel. The said counsel assured that a notice would be sent to him from the office of the learned Commissioner of Income 1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding a reasonable cause for the delay. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for disposal on merits, emphasizing the need for a speaking order and an opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was filed beyond the statutory limitation. The assessee sought condonation of delay, citing reliance on her previous counsel who failed to inform her about the dismissal of her appeal by the CIT(A) due to non-appearance. The assessee claimed to be not computer savvy and dependent on her counsel.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal was caused by a reasonable cause, and whether the CIT(A) properly disposed of the appeal on merits or dismissed it for non-prosecution.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 151,Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 251(1),Section 250(4),Section 250(6),Section 251(2),Section 246A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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 BENCH AT KOLKATA

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & 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 2016-17 dated 21.07.2023, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, dated 16.12.2019. 1. 1. The Registry has informed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 591 days. An application along with an affidavit seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee stating as under:

“1. That this application is filed for condonation of delay in t

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 →