SHIV KUMAR MISHRA,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD 4(3)(3), KASGANJ/ ETAH
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps, especially with the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to condone the delay and set aside the appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2012-13 was filed against the order of the CIT(A)-NFAC. The case was called twice, but the assessee did not appear, leading to proceedings ex parte. The Sr. DR argued that the assessee was non-cooperative and the appeal was rightly dismissed as barred by limitation.
What were the issues?
Whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal due to possible communication gaps in virtual hearings and restore the matter for fresh adjudication on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)-NFAC”],Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1060133578(1) dated 25.01.2024, involving proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. We, accordingly, proceeded ex parte against him.
Learned Sr. DR, Shri Shrivastava submits that the assessee has been non-cooperative all along and the learned lower authority has rightly dismissed this assessee’s appeal as barred by limitation. He vehemently supports the learned lower authorities’ action in making the addition(s). It emerges from the case records that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in lower appellate proceedings and therefore, in the larger interest of justice, the matter may be restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC.
Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance of the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism could not be altogether ruled out. Faced with this situation, it is deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and to set aside the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication on merits, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.
More judgments on Section 147
- Bha Associates Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs ACIT, Central Circle- 29, New DelhiITA 5208/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: Disposed6 Nov 2026AY 2015-16
- 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
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sanjeevini Health Care vs. M/S.Vijayalakshmi And AssociatesKarnataka · 4 Nov 2026
- Trilok Chandra vs. State Tax OfficerUttarakhand · 4 Nov 2026
- Basant Ballabh Punetha vs. State Of UttarakhandUttarakhand · 4 Nov 2026
- Satyavan vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 4 Nov 2026
- Deepak Kumar Daiya vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 4 Nov 2026