KAMALJEET KAUR GILL, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO-3(1) ESTW. ITO WARD-3(4), RAIPUR, RAIPUR
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was delayed by 608 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay or adjudicating on the merits, stating that the appeal was not admitted for adjudication on merits.
Held
The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back, directing the assessee to explain the 'sufficient cause' for the delay. If satisfied, the CIT(A) should then decide the issue on merits.
Key Issues
The key legal issue was whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the grounds of delay without considering the 'sufficient cause' for such delay and adjudicating the case on its merits.
Sections Cited
Section 249(3), Section 250(4), Section 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY
आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 12.11.2025 for the assessment year 2012-13 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
At the very outset, it is noted that the appeal filed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC was time barred by 608 days and the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had not condoned the said delay and had dismissed the appeal.
I have heard the submissions of the parties herein, even without going into the merits of the matter since the First Appellate Authority had dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay and that the submissions of the assessee were not substantially treated and adjudicated on merits as evident at Page 7, Para-6 of the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC wherein it states “……Accordingly, the appeal is not admitted for adjudication on merits.” It is therefore, clear that the First Appellate Authority did not find merit regarding “sufficient cause” in terms with Section 249(3) of the Act as assailed by the assessee, hence, dismissed the appeal of the assessee without adjudication on merits. Furthermore, as examined even the substantive rights and liabilities of the parties herein
3 Kamaljeet Kaur Gill Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ITA No.79/RPR/2026
could not be fully examined without condoning the said delay. Therefore, in the greater interest of natural justice, I set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and remand the matter back to its file directing the assessee to explain the “sufficient cause” for such delay before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC in terms with Section 249(3) of the Act. Once the said authority is satisfied with the explanation of the assessee, then it shall proceed to decide the issue on merits as per law complying with the principles of natural justice and pass order as per Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act.
As per the above terms grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 26th day of February, 2026.
Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; �दनांक / Dated : 26th February, 2026. SB, Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT-1, Raipur (C.G.)
4 Kamaljeet Kaur Gill Vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Raipur (C.G.) ITA No.79/RPR/2026
�वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “एक-सद�य” ब�च, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Raipur. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5.
आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur
