KANG AGRI FARM,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(3), JALANDHAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 397/ASR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar09 February 2026AY 2021-22Bench: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the minor delay in the assessee's appeal to it and remanded the case back to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was directed to provide the assessee an opportunity to explain the delay in filing the original appeal and, if satisfactorily explained, to admit and adjudicate the appeal on its merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against an ex-parte assessment order was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a delay in filing. The assessee claimed the assessment order was served late, leading to the delay. The Tribunal itself also noted a minor 7-day delay in the assessee's appeal to it, which was condoned.

What were the issues?

The key legal issue was the condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the CIT(A) and whether the assessee should be given an opportunity to explain the delay for the appeal to be heard on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144B,Section 250,Section 249(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA

Hearing: 22.01.2026Pronounced: 09.02.2026

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi dated 19.02.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (henceforth the Act) which has emanated from the order of the AO dated 21.12.2022 passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Tax Act. belatedly by 7 (seven) days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay explaining the fact that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) has not been received through e mail within proper time and the assessee came to know of the disposal of the appeal from the department at a later date, when the assessee was pressed for payment of outstanding tax demand. As such, he prayed for condoning the delay of only seven days in filing this appeal and for admission of the same to be heard on merits.

3.

The ld. D.R. has no objection.

4.

Considering the reasons stated, we condone the minor delay of seven days and admit the appeal to be heard on merits.

5.

There are four grounds taken by the assessee in Form No. 36 and the main grievance of the assessee is against the refusal of the Ld. first appellate authority, to admit the appeal for hearing on merits because of delay in filing the same by more than 30 ( thirty ) days, resulting in the appeal being dismissed as non-admissible u/s 249(2) of the Act.

6.

In course of hearing before the Tribunal, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessment order has been passed ex-parte on 21.12.2022 , but the same has been actually served on 10.04.2023 (as per claim in Form No. 35) and it is submitted that the appeal has been filed the very next day on 11.04.2023 and as such, there is no direction , for admission of the appeal and for hearing before the ld. first appellate authority on merits of the case.

7.

The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that as evident from the record, the assessment order dated 21.12.2022 has been served on the assessee vide e-mail on 21.12.2022 itself in the e-mail provided in the ITR and the assessee has not been able to satisfactorily explain the reasons for the delay.

He further submitted that in course of appellate proceedings, no submission has been made in response to notice issued by the ld. first appellate authority on 03.12.2024 which has resulted in dismissing the appeal for default u/s 249(2) of the Act, and he prayed for sustaining the appellate order.

8.

Considering the rival submissions, we find that that the appeal has not be adjudicated on merits of the case and the same has been dismissed, by the ld. first appellate authority, refusing to admit the appeal for hearing, in absence of proper and satisfactory explanations of delay in filing the appeal.

9.

However, in the interest of justice, we remand the matter back to the file of the ld. first appellate authority to allow the assessee an opportunity of hearing to explain the delay of nearly 81(eighty one) days, and if the same is satisfactorily explained, the adjudicated on merits.

10.

The assessee shall be allowed reasonable and proper opportunity of being heard and we direct the assesse to file all documentary evidences and submissions in support of its contention and to fully co-operate in the appellate proceedings.

11.

We have not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and all issues are left open.

12.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as on 09.02.2026

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →