Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Yogesh Bhagwatrao Chaudhary,Thane vs Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals0, / ... on 27 March, 2026
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCH "G", MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.7106/Mum/2025
(Assessment year: 2018-19)
Yogesh Bhagwatrao vs CIT (Appeals)-50,Mumbai
Chaudhary
6/503, Garden Estate, Off
Pokhran Road-2 Manpada,
Thane(West), Thane-400610
PAN:ADJPC7988H
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
Assessee by : Shri Sagar Sanjay Somani, CA
Respondent by : Smt. Priyan Mashilkar (Sr.AR)
Date of hearing : 25/03/2026
Date of pronouncement : 27/03/2026
ORDER
Per: Anikesh Banerjee (JM):
The instant appeal of the assessee filed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi [for brevity the "Ld. CIT(A)"], order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (for brevity 'the Act') pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19, date of order 08.09.2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the 2 ITA No.7106/Mum/2025 Yogesh Bhagwatrao Chaudhary Assessment Unit Income Tax Department (for brevity the'Ld. AO') order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, date of order 28.02.2024.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, in his individual capacity, filed the return of income declaring a total income of Rs.10,27,920/- under the head "Income from Salary." During the course of assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO made an addition of Rs.2,37,979/- in relation to salary income and further disallowed deductions claimed under sections 80C, 80D, 80DD and 80CCD(1)(b) of the Act, amounting to Rs.2,45,228/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of five months. During the appellate proceedings, the assessee filed a detailed submission on 20.08.2025 along with supporting documents, including Form No. 16, housing loan certificate, insurance and PPF receipts, tuition fee receipts, and medical disability records pertaining to his son, Mr. Vihaan Y. Chaudhary, who suffers from 75% permanent intellectual disability. The assessee also explained the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal. However, the Ld. CIT(A), without duly considering the submissions and supporting evidences, rejected the appeal on the ground of limitation. Being aggrieved, the assessee has preferred the present appeal before us.
3. The Ld. AR submitted a paper book comprising pages 1 to 77, which has been taken on record. It was contended that the delay in filing the appeal occurred due to the assessee's preoccupation with providing medical care and support to his son, who suffers from 75% permanent intellectual disability. The disability certificate evidencing the same is placed at APB page 48. It was further submitted that the assessee had filed a duly notarized affidavit dated 30.12.2025 3 ITA No.7106/Mum/2025 Yogesh Bhagwatrao Chaudhary before the Bench, explaining the reasons for the delay. The assessee stated that he was required to devote substantial time and attention to the care of his son, which rendered him unable to take timely steps for filing the appeal. It was emphasized that the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate but was due to circumstances beyond the assessee's control. The Ld. AR further submitted that all relevant medical records and documents substantiating the claim of deductions under Chapter VI-A of the Act were duly furnished in the paper book. Accordingly, it was prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after condoning the delay.
4. The Ld. DR argued and stated that assessee had not filed the proper condonation petition before the Ld. CIT(A). Explanation of delay for filing appeal in Form No.35 was improper and not carrying the sufficient cause for delay. He stands in favor of the orders of revenue authorities.
5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was filed with a delay of five months. However, on careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the delay was occasioned due to bona fide and reasonable causes beyond the control of the assessee. From the record, it is evident that the assessment proceedings were completed ex parte under section 144 of the Act. Further, the assessee has filed a duly notarized affidavit explaining the reasons for delay, supported by medical records demonstrating serious health conditions of his son, who was suffering from a 75% permanent intellectual disability. Considering the medical condition, and the circumstances narrated in the affidavit, we find that the explanation constitutes a "sufficient cause" within 4 ITA No.7106/Mum/2025 Yogesh Bhagwatrao Chaudhary the meaning of section 249 of the Act. In our considered view, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal in limine without properly appreciating the facts and without granting adequate opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the reasons for delay. The principles of natural justice warrant that a litigant should not be denied adjudication on merits when reasonable cause is demonstrated. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A). The matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merits by passing a speaking order after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the appellate proceedings, and the Ld. CIT(A) shall decide the issues in accordance with law. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.7106/Mum/2025 is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 27th day of March 2026.
Sd/- Sd/-
(PRABHASH SHANKAR) (ANIKESH BANERJEE)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai,िदनां क/Dated: 27/03/2026
SAUMYA Sr.PS
Copy of the Order forwarded to:
1. अपीलाथ /The Appellant ,
2. ितवादी/ The Respondent.
3. आयकरआयु CIT
4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुंबई/DR, ITAT,
Mumbai
5
ITA No.7106/Mum/2025
Yogesh Bhagwatrao Chaudhary
5. गाडफाइल/Guard file.
BY ORDER,
//True Copy//
(Asstt. Registrar), ITAT, MUMBAI