NEETA GUPTA, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO-4(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was time-barred by 48 days. The CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay, although it also discussed the merits of the case. The assessee appealed to the ITAT, arguing that the delay should have been condoned.
Held
The ITAT observed that the CIT(Appeals) did not properly adjudicate the 'sufficient cause' for the delay. To ensure natural justice and allow for a full examination of substantive rights, the ITAT set aside the CIT(Appeals) order and remanded the matter back for fresh consideration of the delay and then the merits.
Key Issues
The key legal issue was whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal and in dismissing it without fully considering the 'sufficient cause' explanation under Section 249(3).
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 17.11.2025 for the assessment year 2018-19 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 and the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC had not condoned the delay and had dismissed the appeal of the assessee also while discussing the merits of the case. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that they have explained reasons for such delay before the First Appellate Authority, however, the said delay was not condoned and the appeal was dismissed.
The Ld. Sr. DR submitted that there is delay of 48 days in filing appeal before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and the assessee was not able to explain the sufficient cause in terms with Section 249(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) before the said authority, for which, the appeal was dismissed while not condoning the said delay.
Having 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, though having discussed the
3 Neeta Gupta Vs. ITO-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) ITA No.757/RPR/2025
issues of the appeal, however, it is a matter of common knowledge on the grounds of delay that submissions of the assessee were not substantially treated and adjudicated as evident at Page 18 of the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC wherein it states “the appeal is dismissed on merits. Delay is not condoned.” 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. Furthermore, as examined even the substantive rights and liabilities of the parties herein 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.
4 Neeta Gupta Vs. ITO-4(1), Raipur (C.G.) ITA No.757/RPR/2025
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 23rd day of February, 2026.
Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; �दनांक / Dated : 23rd 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. �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
