What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the reasons for the delay to be bonafide and genuine, and thus condoned the delay. Subsequently, at the time of hearing, the assessee's Authorized Representative requested to withdraw the appeal.

The assessee filed an appeal against an order dated 31.12.2024. The appeal was found to be barred by limitation by 42 days. A condonation petition was filed for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee and to allow the withdrawal of the appeal.

Dipa Dey vs I.T.O., Ward - 37(1) | ITAT Kolkata 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

Date of concluding the hearing : 04.02.2026 Date of pronouncing the order : 05.03.2026 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM

The present appeal filed by the assessee arises from order dated 31.12.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Chennai (hereinafter referred to ‘the Ld. Addl./JCIT (A)] for A.Y. 2020-21.

At the outset, we observe from the appeal folder that the appeal of the revenue is barred by limitation by 42 days for which the condonation petition is filed. After perusing the contents of the application, we find that the delay is attributable to bonafide and genuine reasons. Therefore, we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.

Dipa Dey 3. At the time of hearing, a written submission dated 04.02.2026 was placed before us by the Ld. A.R requesting the Bench to allow the withdrawal of the impugned appeal. Accordingly accepting the request of the assessee, we dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn.

DIPA DEY,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 37(1),, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments