Section 271F of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 271F is State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty (60 ITR 239), cited in 78 of the 927 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 271F

State of Kerala v. C. Velukutty
60 ITR 239 · 1966 · Supreme Court
78
citing judgments

A best judgment assessment must be based on wisdom, truth, and legal principles, not arbitrary caprice. While it involves estimation and guesswork, this must have a reasonable nexus to available material and the case's circumstances.

CIT v. Surendra Prasad Agrawal
275 ITR 113 · 2005 · High Court
38
citing judgments

The omission by an Income Tax Officer to initiate penalty proceedings during the assessment, when there is an observation of under-reporting or mis-reporting of income, renders the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue, granting the Commissioner jurisdiction to revise such an order under Section 263.

1) Bhagwan Sahai Sharma v. Dy. CIT
174 Taxmann.com 273 · 2025 · High Court
23
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings initiated for AY 2015-16 after April 1, 2021, are barred by limitation and invalid, as per the amended provisions of the Finance Act, 2020.

Revenue. I. CIT v. Satish Medical Agencies
292 ITR 163 · 2007 · High Court
17
citing judgments

A conscious act by the assessee to hide information from the department is a key factor in upholding revenue assessments and penalties.

14 (Delhi) 2) Lalit Gulati v. Asstt. CIT
305 Taxmann 11 · High Court
11
citing judgments
Gordhanbhai Devjibhai Kapadia v. ITO
177 Taxmann.com 714 · 2025 · High Court
10
citing judgments

A notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act issued after March 31, 2021, is invalid if it relies on the extended time limit provided by the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020, for assessment years prior to 2021-22.

Manubhai A. Sheth v. N. D. Nirgudkar, Second ITO
128 ITR 87 · 1981 · High Court
9
citing judgments
S.M.I.L.E. Micro Finance Ltd. v. ACIT
479 ITR 172 · 2025 · High Court
6
citing judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax v. Kanubhai Muljibhai Patel
306 ITR 179 · 2008 · High Court
4
citing judgments
Jayanthi Shri v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-I, Coimbatore
75 Taxmann.com 248 · 2016 · High Court
4
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 271F

K Godaji Abhang Patil Nagri Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit, Sangamner vs. ITO, Ward 2, Ahmednagar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1573/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1573/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-2018 K Godaji Abhang Patil Vs Ito, Ward 2, Nagri Sahkari Patsanstha Ahmednagar Maryadit, New Akole Bypass Road, Opp. Telephone Exchange, Sangamner-422605 Maharashtra Pan-Aaabk0444N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Aakash ParakhFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhivare
Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)Section 271FSection 80A(5)Section 80P

Soofi Tyre Palace, Anantnag vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, Udhampur

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 152/ASR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.149/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.150/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.151/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.152/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S Soofi Tyre Palace Ito बनाम/ Vs. (Partner Sajad Ahmad Sofi) Ward Udhampur Anantnag, J&K 192 101 Jammu & Kashmir. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adlfs-7057-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Mohd Iqbal Untoo (Ca) – Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondentby : Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Quantum Appeal As Well As Penalty Appeals By Assessee Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of First Appellate Authority. Ita

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd Iqbal Untoo (CA) – Ld.ARFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(b)

Soofi Tyre Palace, Anantnag vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, Udhampur

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 150/ASR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.149/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.150/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.151/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.152/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S Soofi Tyre Palace Ito बनाम/ Vs. (Partner Sajad Ahmad Sofi) Ward Udhampur Anantnag, J&K 192 101 Jammu & Kashmir. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adlfs-7057-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Mohd Iqbal Untoo (Ca) – Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondentby : Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Quantum Appeal As Well As Penalty Appeals By Assessee Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of First Appellate Authority. Ita

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd Iqbal Untoo (CA) – Ld.ARFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(b)

Soofi Tyre Palace, Anantnag vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, Udhampur

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 149/ASR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Jm 1. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.149/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.150/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.151/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) & 4. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.152/Asr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S Soofi Tyre Palace Ito बनाम/ Vs. (Partner Sajad Ahmad Sofi) Ward Udhampur Anantnag, J&K 192 101 Jammu & Kashmir. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adlfs-7057-K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/Appellant By : Sh. Mohd Iqbal Untoo (Ca) – Ld.Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondentby : Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07-08-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Quantum Appeal As Well As Penalty Appeals By Assessee Arises Out Of Separate Orders Of First Appellate Authority. Ita

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd Iqbal Untoo (CA) – Ld.ARFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(b)

Purab Infrastructure Projects Limited, Amritsar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2), Amritsar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 31/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: None (written submission)
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 271FSection 69A

Ranjeet Kumar (Individual), Begusarai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2 (1), Begusarai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 198/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna06 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 144BSection 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 282Section 69

Late Satish Mehta Thru Lh Kapil Mehta, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 34(4) New Delhi, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4646/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 159Section 159(3)Section 2(7)

Sudha Gupta, Bilaspur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Bilaspur

ITA 435/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: HeardITAT Raipur05 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No: 435/Rpr/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" Assessment Year: 2018-19)

For Appellant: Shri R. B. Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 250Section 69A

Mrs. Surekha L/R of Late Shri. Devaraj, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(5), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 910/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Respondent: Shri B.S. Balachandran
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 269SSection 271(1)(c)Section 271D

Kalyan Kumar, Sant Kabeer Nagar vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal, Basti

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 239/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year:2017-18 Kalyan Kumar V. The Ito Ruihatta, Mehdawal Basti - New Sant Kabir Nagar (U.P) Tan/Pan:Bmmpk2586A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 69A

Randheer Singh, Faizabad vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, NFAC, Centre, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 218/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2017-18 Randheer Singh V. The Assessment Unit Nara Pura Bazar Income Tax Department Faizabad Nfac, Delhi Tan/Pan:Gpfps1546D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shailendra Mishra, Advocate Respondent By: Shri R. K. Agarwal, Cit(Dr) O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Shailendra Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT(DR)
Section 115BSection 144BSection 147Section 147rSection 148Section 69A

Rahul Shrikrishna Dharap, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 22(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2132/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14 Rahul Shrikrishna Dharap Ito Ward 22(3)(1) Piramal Chambers, 00, Wardoli, Panvel, Mumbai-400020. Wavarle B.O, Panvel, Vs. Raigarh-410206. (Pan: Airpd2580P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Yash Agrawal, Ca Revenue : Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Yash Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271(1)(b)Section 271F

Sankaram Siram, Dagguluru Village, W.G.Dist vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Palakol

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 195/VIZ/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.195/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14) Sankaram Siram Vs. Income Tax Officer West Godavari Ward-1 Pan : Apdps3611R Palakol

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 68

Sanjaysinh Pravinsinh Chudasama, Bhavnagar vs. The ITO, Ward-1(5), Bhavnagar

ITA 86/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B. P. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 234ASection 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271F

Kevalram Lalaram Chaudhari, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 3(3)(3), Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 210/SRT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.210/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Kevalram Lalaram Chaudhari, Vs. Ito, 275, Bhagirath Nagar – 2, Anjani Ward – 3(3)(3), Road, Varachha Road, Surat – Surat 395006 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Ahrpc3926F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22/07/2025

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Ms. Krishna Fashion World, Chembur vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result, all the four appeals are hereby dismissed

ITA 3271/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 3270 To 3273/Mum/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2013-14) M/S. Krishna Fashion V/S. Income Tax Officer World बनाम Income Tax Officer, Ward 803/804, T-6, Godrej 22(2)(1), Room No. 312, Prime Colony, Sahakar Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug Nagar No.2, Shell Colony, 400012 Chembur, Mumbai 400071 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aajfk2799R Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By: Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit Dr A/W Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 10.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 22.07.2025 आदेश / Order Per Renu Jauhri [A.M.] :- These Four Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi 24.05.20254 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “Act”] For Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2013-14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds In These Appeals.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR a/w
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151Section 250

Vanaja, Tamil Nadu vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Hosur, Hosur Tamil Nadu

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1345/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1345/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. Mrs. Vanaja, The Ito, 43/B, Chandra Chudeswar Nagar, Ward-1, Hosur-636 701, Hosur. Dharmapuri District, Tamil Nadu. [Pan: Acdpv 9863 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, Ca [By Virtual] : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, Jcit : सुनवाईक"तारीख/Date Of Hearing 16.07.2025 : घोषणाक"तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 21.07.2025

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 271F

Mohan Ramchandani, Banglore vs. ACIT-Intl Tax-2 Ahemdabad, Ahmedabad Gujarat

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1944/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2016-17 Mohan Ramchandani Acit-Intl Tax-2 Flat-11001 Boddaballapur Road Vs. Ahmedabad. Presting Monte Carlo Yelahanka Satelite Town So Bangalore North. Pan : Adgpr 0211 D (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Saurabh Gupta, Ar Assessee By : Shri Saresh Kartik Laxmanbhai, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/07/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 17/07/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Saresh Kartik Laxmanbhai, Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 54ESection 54FSection 54F(4)

Shshank Varshne, Chandausi vs. ITO, Chandausi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2116/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.4220/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2013-14) Shshank Varshney, Income Tax Officer, Jyoti Seets, Brahm Bazar, Ward-2(5), Dist:-Sambhal, Vs. Chandausi. Uttar Pradesh-244412. Pan-Cmcpk9337C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ca Ramsha Department By Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/07/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Two Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (‘The Ld. Cit” In Short) Arising Out Of The Order Of Assessing Officer Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 144 & 271F Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Delayed By 592 Days Before The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Order U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act & Also Filed Appeal Delayed By 427 Days Against Penalty Order U/S 271F Of The Act. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Admitted Both The Appeals Of The Assessee On Account Of Delay By Not Condoning The Delay In Filing The Appeals. Shashank Varshne Vs. Ito 3. Against These Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), The Assessee Is In Appeal Before Us By Stating That The Assessee Has Not Received The Notices Issued By The Ao As Well As Cit(A) As The Notices Were Stated To Have Being Sent On The Email Address” Chinto1411988@Gmail.Com Which Was Neither Belong To Assessee Nor His Earlier Counsel. As The Notices Issued From Time To Time Were Not Received By The Assessee, The Necessary Compliance Could Not Be Made Before The Lower Authorities. Assessee Also Filed An Affidavit In Support Of The Contentions Raised For The Delay Before The Ld. Cit(A) Which Reads As Under: Shashank Varshne Vs. Ito

Section 147Section 271F

Shshank Varshney, Chandausi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(5), Chandausi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 4220/DEL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.4220/Del/2024 (Assessment Year 2013-14) Shshank Varshney, Income Tax Officer, Jyoti Seets, Brahm Bazar, Ward-2(5), Dist:-Sambhal, Vs. Chandausi. Uttar Pradesh-244412. Pan-Cmcpk9337C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ca Ramsha Department By Shri Dheeraj Kumar Jaiswal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 16/07/2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against Two Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (‘The Ld. Cit” In Short) Arising Out Of The Order Of Assessing Officer Passed U/S 147 R.W.S 144 & 271F Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The Act) For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Delayed By 592 Days Before The Ld. Cit(A) Against The Order U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Act & Also Filed Appeal Delayed By 427 Days Against Penalty Order U/S 271F Of The Act. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Admitted Both The Appeals Of The Assessee On Account Of Delay By Not Condoning The Delay In Filing The Appeals. Shashank Varshne Vs. Ito 3. Against These Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A), The Assessee Is In Appeal Before Us By Stating That The Assessee Has Not Received The Notices Issued By The Ao As Well As Cit(A) As The Notices Were Stated To Have Being Sent On The Email Address” Chinto1411988@Gmail.Com Which Was Neither Belong To Assessee Nor His Earlier Counsel. As The Notices Issued From Time To Time Were Not Received By The Assessee, The Necessary Compliance Could Not Be Made Before The Lower Authorities. Assessee Also Filed An Affidavit In Support Of The Contentions Raised For The Delay Before The Ld. Cit(A) Which Reads As Under: Shashank Varshne Vs. Ito

Section 147Section 271F