AKANSHA YOGESH DESHMUKH,BPCL STAFF COLONY vs. ITO/DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION MUMBAI, INCOME TAX BUILDING

ITA 8949/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 February 2026AY 2018-1918 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's explanation for the delay did not constitute a 'sufficient cause' under Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found the reason to reflect a lack of due diligence and negligence, and thus rejected the condonation of delay.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal challenging the NFAC's order for AY 2018-19. The appeal before the CIT(A) was delayed by 140 days. The assessee, an NRI, cited infrequent access to the Income Tax portal due to non-taxable income in India as the reason for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was a 'sufficient cause' warranting condonation under Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 144,Section 115BBE,Section 147,Section 142(1),Section 143(2),Section 148,Section 249,Section 270AA,Section 201

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, I BENCH MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & HON’BLE SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

Hearing: 18.02.2026Pronounced: 19.02.2026

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 30.10.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2018-19. The following grounds are reproduced below: Akansha Yogesh Deshmukh “1. CIT(A) Illegally Dismissed Appeal in Limine Without Opportunity of Hearing: On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine without granting any effective or further opportunity of bei

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 115BBE

All 8,662 judgments and leading authorities on Section 115BBE →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →