MOHAMMED HELALUDDIN AHMED,HOJAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD, NAGAON

ITA 329/GTY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals filed by the assessee, Mohammed Helaluddin Ahmed, against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2013-14. The primary issues were the non-condonation of a 47-day delay in filing the appeal and the confirmation of a penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act by the CIT (A). The Income Tax Officer had earlier levied the penalty, which was contested. The Tribunal found the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal to be bona fide and genuine, leading to the condonation of the delay and restoration of the appeal for re-evaluation on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 835420 (ITAT-GUWAHATI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 30-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY JHA
• Assessee Lawyers: NOT CONDONING
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA) BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JM AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, AM ITA Nos. 329 & 330/GTY/2025 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Mohammed Helaluddin Ahmed Dankingaon, Gopal Nagar, Hojai, Nagaon-782435, Assam Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Aaykar Bhawan, RK road, Nagaon-782001, Assam (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AJMPA8957F Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Jha, DR Date of hearing: 11.02.2026 Date of pronouncement: 11.02.2026 O R D E R Per George Mathan, JM: These are appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] in appeal nos. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1080193539(1) vide order dated 30.08.2025 for A.Y. 2013-14. The penalty was levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act vide order dated 26.08.2022 by the ITO, Ward-Nagaon. 2. None represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sanjay Jha represented on behalf of the Revenue. 3. It was submitted by the ld. DR that the order of the ld. CIT (A) is an ex-parte order. A perusal of the CIT (A)’s order noticed that the Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 ITA Nos. 329 & 330/GTY/2025 Mohammed Helaluddin Ahmed; A.Y. 2013-14 learned CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by not condoning the delay of 47 days on the ground that no sufficient cause was demonstrated by the assessee for late filing of the appeal. Therefore, the assessee prayed that the delay of 47 days may be condoned and appeal of the assessee may kindly be restored to the file of the learned CIT (A) for fresh adjudication. 4. The learned DR on the other hand left the issue to the wisdom of the Bench. 5. After hearing the ld. DR and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the learned CIT (A) has not condoned the delay of 47 days for late filing of the appeal for the reason that the delay has no bonafide and genuineness reason. We have gone through the reasons attributable to late filing of appeal and found that the reasons are bonafide and genuine and accordingly, we condone the delay of 47 days. In the same breath, we restore the appeal to the file of the learned CIT (A) to decide the appeal on merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In respect of ITA No. 330/GTY/25 which is against the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, which has been confirmed by the ld. CIT (A). 7. We are of the view that as the quantum appeal has been restored to the file of the ld. CIT (A), the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, is also to be decided after deciding the quantum appeal and therefore restore to CIT (A) for adjudication after giving opportunity to assessee. Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 ITA Nos. 329 & 330/GTY/2025 Mohammed Helaluddin Ahmed; A.Y. 2013-14 8. In the result, the appeals in ITA No. 330/GTY/25 and ITA 329/GTY/2025 are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 11.02.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (GEORGE MATHAN) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 11.02.2026 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. Printed from counselvise.com "