MAHADEV SHIKARI,UDHAM SINGH NAGAR vs. ITO, RUDRAUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 220/DDN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 April 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)3 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 delays, relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against penalty orders with significant delays of 285 and 280 days. The CIT(A)/NFAC refused to condone these delays, citing insufficient explanation.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals against penalty orders was sufficiently explained and should be condoned for substantial justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271AAC1,Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, DEHRADUN “SMC” BENCH, DEHRADUN

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI M. BALAGANESH

Hearing: 20.03.2025Pronounced: 23.04.2025

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM These assessee’s twin appeals & 222/DDN/2024 for assessment year 2017-18 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s orders, both dated 11.11.2024 having DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070237146(1) and ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070237224(1), involving proceedings under sections 271AAC1 and 270A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone 285 and 280 days’ delay, case-wise; respectively in filing of the assessee’s lower appeals instituted on 31st and 30th January, 2023 against the corresponding penalty orders dated 16th and 21st of March, 2022, respectively as not sufficiently explained.

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →