MAHESH SHARMA,MATHURA V. WARD 1(3)(1), MATHURA, MATHURA

ITA 84/AGR/2026

AI Insights

The case involves Mahesh Sharma, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which had dismissed his appeal as time-barred. The original assessment order was passed on 21.02.2023 under sections 147 read with 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2018-19. The first appeal was filed late, with a delay of 267 days, and the CIT(A) dismissed it without condoning the delay due to the absence of a reasoned prayer for condonation. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found that the principles of substantial justice should prevail over technicalities and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) to consider the condonation of delay and decide the appeal afresh on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 846263 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Agra
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 28-01-2026
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAILENDRA SRIVASTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJESH MALHOTRA
• Keywords: Set aside; Period of limitation; Time period of passing order
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA (SMC) BENCH, AGRA BEFORE: SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 84/Agr/2026 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Mahesh Sharma, LIG 74, Mahavidhya Colony Phase 2, Mathura H.O., Mathura-281003 Vs. ITO Ward 1(3)(1), Mathura PAN : BDXPS5636R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Rajesh Malhotra, CA. Department by Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of hearing 19.03.2026 Date of pronouncement 27.03.2026 ORDER PER: SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 03.11.2025 passed in appeal No NFAC/2017-18/10305083 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A) u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2018-19, wherein ld CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal in limine as time barred. 2. At the very outset, without going on merit and after hearing the parties, it is noticed that first appeal was filed on 16.12.2023 against the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.84/Agr/2026 2 | P a g e assessment order dated 21.02.2023 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act by a delay of about 267 days. It appears that the factum of delay caused in filing first appeal before ld CIT(A) was mentioned in negative in Form 35. This apart, the application with the prayer for the condonation of said delay does not seem to have been filed before the ld CIT(A). The limitation period for filing appeal before ld CIT(A) u/s 249(2) of the Act is 30 days, however, section 249(3) of the Act empowers the first appellate authority to condone the delay if satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not presenting it within the prescribed period. Ld CIT(A), did not find any sufficient cause to condone the said delay for want of any reasoned prayer and dismissed assessee’s appeal in limine. 3. In such facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice, we deem it just and appropriate to afford an opportunity of hearing to the assessee to file an application for condoning of the said delay caused in filing the first appeal before the first appellate authority. Ld CIT(Appeals) shall keep in mind the legal principle that substantial justice cannot be denied on technical aberrations and no party should ordinarily be denied the opportunity of participating in the process of justice dispensation, the appeal is thus liable to be allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.84/Agr/2026 3 | P a g e 4. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Impugned order dated 03.11.2025 is set aside. Order pronounced on – 27.03.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (M BALAGANESH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 27.03.2026 *Aamir Siddiqui, PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra Printed from counselvise.com "