NANJAPPA SHIVAMURTHY,CHINTAMANI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 CHIKABALLAPUR, CHIKKABALLAPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that there was an error in the address on the assessment order, suggesting it was not delivered. The CIT-A's action of calling for a remand report indicated an acceptance of the delay. The Tribunal also observed that the assessment was made ex-parte during the COVID period, and the assessee's illiteracy prevented access to online information.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT-A with a delay of 224 days, stating that the assessment order was not received due to an incorrect address and that the assessee is illiterate. The CIT-A dismissed the appeal for delay. The assessee is now before the ITAT, arguing that the delay should be condoned and the issue decided on merit.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT-A should be condoned and the appeal decided on merits, considering the circumstances of ex-parte assessment during the COVID period and errors in the address.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 264(1),Section 10(10C),Section 154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide 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.
- S.R. Koshti v. CIT217 citing276 ITR 165 · 2005 · HC
- Vareli Textile Industry v. CIT29 citing154 Taxmann 33
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI WASEEM AHMED
PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 16/02/2024 in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1061036557(1) for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The assessee before us has raised as many as 11 grounds of appeal but the relevant ground which requires to be adjudicated by us at this juncture is ground No. 5 of the memo of appeal. In this ground, the grievance raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT-A erred in confirming the order of the AO without hearing the assessee on merit.
In the present case, the appeal was filed by the assessee before the learned CIT-A w
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S A2Z Infra Engineering LTD vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
