SIDDHI DIAMOND ,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(8) OLD WARD-1(5), BHAVNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2167/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 February 2026AY 2012-13Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned both the 48-day delay in filing the appeal before itself and the 28-day delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A)'s order was set aside, and the CIT(A) was directed to grant a fresh hearing to the assessee and decide the case on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against a CIT(A) order that refused to condone a 28-day delay in filing an appeal against an assessment order for AY 2012-13 under sections 143(3) r.w.s. 147. There was also a 48-day delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, explained by a misconception about the correct appellate forum.

What were the issues?

Condonation of delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH

Before: DR. BRR Kumar & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar

ITA No: 2167/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Siddhi Diamond The ITO, Kamal Shanti, Ward-1(8) Nr. Babubhai Jashbhai Vs Old Ward-1(5), Patel Underbridge, Bhavnagar Bharat Colony, Sardar Patel Colony, Navjivan, Ahmedabad-380009 Gujarat PAN: AAOFS5974P (Respondent) (Appellant) Assessee Represented: Shri M.S. Chhajed, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Uday kakne Kishanrao, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 09-02-2026 Date of pronouncement : 19-02-2026 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against appellate order dated 16-07-2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), refusing to condone the delay of 28 days in filing the appeal arising out of the assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

The registry has noted that there is delay of 48 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal which is explained by way of Notarized Affidavit. There was a misconception of filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A) against the giving effect order, rather against the CIT(A)’s order before this Tribunal which has resulted in delay of 48 days in filing the above appeal. Considering the explanation offered, the delay of 48 days in flinging the appeal is hereby condoned.

3.

The delay of 28 days in filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee claimed that assessment order was not served in the address mentioned in the Income Tax portal as well as in the registered email. On verification from the portal, assessee came to know about the reassessment order which has resulted in 28 days delay in filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A).

4.

We are satisfied with the explanation offered by the assessee thereby 28 days delay in filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A) is hereby condoned and the appellate order is set-aside with the direction to Ld. CIT(A) to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and decide the case on merits. Needless to say, the assessee should make use of this final opportunity of hearing and for passing order on merits of the case.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →