RANJANA VIJAYKUMAR SHARMA,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(4) RANGE CODE 3, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 642/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 February 2026AY 2016-17Bench: DR. MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member)1 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 the delay, acknowledging the assessee's bonafide reasons. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal on merits after providing a fair hearing, citing a High Court judgment that mandates disposal on merits even in ex-parte orders.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 176 days. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) for hearings. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudicating on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal is condonable and whether the CIT(A) is obliged to adjudicate on merits even if the assessee fails to appear.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 50C,Section 250(6)

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, NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGPUR

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD

Hearing: 03.02.2026Pronounced: 10.02.2026

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”], dated 07/02/2025 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') which is arising out of assessment order dated 15.03.2022 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act for the Assessment Year 2016-17 (A.Y.)

2.

Registry has informed that there is a delay of 176 days in filing the instant appeal. Application for condonation of delay along with affidavit has been filed and placed on record.

2 ITA.No.642/NAG/2025 (Ranjana Vijaykumar Sharma) Ld.Departmental Representative (DR) opposed for condonation of delay. I have gone through the contents of the affidavit and the reasons stated for delay and find that the same are reasonable cause and the assessee had bonafide reason giving rise to this delay and also find that the delay is not intentional and the assessee has not gained by delaying in filing of the appeal. Therefore, adopting a justice oriented approach and also taking guidance from the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [(1987) 2 SCC 107] and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382), I hereby condone the delay of 176 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

3.

At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee requested for remitting the issues to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as the assessee failed to appear before the Ld.CIT(A) on the dates given for hearing.

4.

Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) did not oppose the request made by the learned counsel for the assessee.

5.

I have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before me. I observe that the assessee is an individual and income of ₹ 2,61,090/- declared in the income tax return for A.Y. 2016-17 filed on 12.05.2016. Assessment u/s. 147

3 ITA.No.642/NAG/2025 (Ranjana Vijaykumar Sharma) r.w.s. 144B of the Act has been framed on 15.03.2022. Against the income of ₹ 2,61,090/- declared by the assessee, ld.AO has made the addition u/s. 50C of the Act at ₹ 13,88,000/- and assessed the income of ₹ 16,49,090/-. Thereafter, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who granted three opportunities to the assessee and that too on a short interval 06.01.2025, 13.01.2025 & 22.01.2025 and thereafter Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without dealing with on merits of the case. Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay) [2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bom.) has held that Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits, even in an ex-parte order.

6.

Under these given facts and circumstances, I deem it appropriate to afford one more opportunity to the assessee and direct the Ld.CIT(A) to adjudicate all the issues raised on merits of the case by way of passing a speaking order as contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act after duly considering the details filed by the assessee as well as settled judicial precedents. Needless to mention that Ld.CIT(A) shall grant fair hearing of opportunity to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

4 ITA.No.642/NAG/2025 (Ranjana Vijaykumar Sharma) 7. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →