JANARDAN NAMDEV GAWALI,AMBARNATH vs. ITO WARD2(2) KALYAN, KALYAN

ITA 8245/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 January 2026AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, citing the assessee's reasonable cause and the principle of substantial justice over technical considerations. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) which was dismissed ex-parte. The appeal was delayed by 394 days. The assessee, a senior citizen with limited technical skills, explained the delay was due to challenges in accessing electronic communications and unawareness of proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal is condonable and whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 148,Section 49(1),Section 48

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, “H (SMC

Before: SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAILSHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

For Appellant: Ms. Mamta Watwani
For Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe, Sr.DR

PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The assessee has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 19/08/2024, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2011-12. 2

2.

The present appeal is delayed by 394 days. Along with the appeal, the assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of delay, submitting as follows: – “I am preferring appeal before your honour against the Order u/s 250 of Income Tax Act,19

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 →