Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2015-16. There was a delay of 113 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), which was dismissed. The assessee also faced a delay in filing before the ITAT.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the assessee was undergoing medical treatment and resided in a remote area, which caused delays. The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing before the CIT(A) and ITAT in the interest of justice.
Key Issues
Whether there was sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) and ITAT.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH ‘SMC’ : AGRA.
(Assessment Year: 2015-16) Upendra Singh Gour, vs. ITO, Ward 2(3)(4), A 4/26, Rajghat Colony, Lalitpur – 284 403 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : BGJPG3206J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 14.10.2025 Date of Order : 28.10.2025 O R D E R
PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 24.07.2024 for the Assessment Year 2015-16.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We are proceeding to decide the appeal with the assistance of the ld. DR of the Revenue.
At the time of hearing, it was observed that there was a delay of 113 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT (A) and the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that there is no merit in the statement as mentioned in Form No.35 of appeal for condonation of delay. It is also observed from the letter on record that assessee was undergoing medical treatment because of serious illness for several months and assessee also reside in a remote area with limited access of networks and professional assistance which further delayed assessee’s ability to receive timely guidance and complete the required filing/procedure. It is also observed from the grounds of appeal
that assessee has made a plea that ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in refusing to condone the delay in filing the appeal without appreciating the reasonable cause for such delay as explained by the assessee. Further we observed that there is delay in filing the appeal with the delay of 289 days before the ITAT and it was informed that the assessee has received the appellate order only on 15.07.2025, hence there is no delay.
4. Ld. DR of the Revenue relied on the findings of the lower authorities.
5. Considered the submissions of the ld. DR of the Revenue and material placed on record. After going through the submissions made by the assessee in his letter placed on record, we are of the view that there was sufficient cause in delay filing of the appeal before the ld. CIT (A) and ITAT, hence, in the interest of justice, we condone the same. Further, we restore the matter to the file of ld. CIT (A) to decide afresh as per law, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the ld.CIT (A) on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 28th day of October, 2025.