URMILA RCP PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,RANCHI vs. ITO(TDS), RANCHI

PDF · subscribers

ITA 106/RAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi06 January 2026AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)1 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the prescribed time. Consequently, the delay of 184 days was condoned, and the issues were restored to the file of the Id. JCIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Delhi, for AY 2015-16. The assessee's appeal before the lower appellate authority was dismissed due to a delay of 184 days in filing.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the lower appellate authority should be condoned, and if so, whether the appeal should be restored for adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

IT Act

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY

For Appellant: Shri Manjeet Kumar Verma, A.R

For Respondent: Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR

Hearing: 06/01/2026Pronounced: 06/01/2026

Assessee represented by Shri Manjeet Kumar Verma, A.R. Department represented by Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR Date of hearing 06/01/2026 Date of pronouncement 06/01/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2014-15/10211206 dated 10/01/2025 for the A.Y. 2015-16.

Shri Manjeet Kumar Verma, ld. A.R. is represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Rajib Jain, ld. CIT-DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that the ld. JCIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without condoning the delay of 184 days. It was a prayer that the delay may be condoned and the issues in the appeal restored to the file of ld. JCIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

In reply, the ld. CIT-DR has vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer and the ld. JCIT(A).

Urmila RCP Projects P Ltd. Vs ITO(TDS) 5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in not filing the appeal within time. Consequently, the delay of 184 days in filing appeal before the ld. JCIT(A) stands condoned and the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of ld. JCIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order announced in open court on 06/01/2026.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →