Rejecting condonation of delay and dismissing appeal without verifying medical certificates – ITAT sets aside order of CIT(A)
In a recent judgment, ITAT Lucknow set aside the order of the CIT(A) as he rejected the assessee’s request for condonation of delay without conducting any independent inquiry regarding the genuineness of the medical certificates produced.
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
4942 (2025) (12) abcaus.in ITAT
In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) in rejecting the condonation application and dismissing the appeal as time-barred without entering into the merits of the case.
The assessment in this case was completed by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 147 read with section 144B of the Act treating cash deposits in bank as unexplained in absence of any representation of the assessee to the statutory notices issued and non verification of the sources of these deposits.
Before the CIT(A), there was a delay in filing the appeal by the assessee. The assessee stated that medical exigency was the cause of the delay as she was suffering from severe medical condition that required prolonged treatment and recovery.
However, the CIT(A) observed that during the appellate proceedings, the appellant filed medical certificate showing illness for a given period. However, an examination of the medical certificate revealed that the assessee was sick only for the period exactly between the passing of date of order and filing the appeal.
With above observation the CIT(A) opined that the medical certificate seemed to be fabricated prepared only for the condonation of delay. Therefore, the said certificate cannot be considered. Hence, the CIT(A) declined to accept the delay of 150 days and as a result dismissed the appeal.
The Tribunal noted that it was evident that CIT(A) did not conduct any independent inquiry regarding the genuineness of the medical certificates. Rather, he rejected the assessee’s request for condonation without verifying the correctness of the claim.
As a result, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the grounds of the appeal to the CIT(A) for deciding the grounds afresh after verifying to correctness of the medical exigency claim.Â
Download Full Judgment Click Here >>
- Form 26 to replace Form 3CD of tax audit report by a CA from Tax Year 2026-27
- When no addition is made on the basis of reasons recorded, reopening is bad in law
- No separate compensation for loss of love and affection under MV Act – SC
- Trust accredited by National Open School eligible for registration u/s 12AB & u/s 80G
- Delay in furnishing Form 10B – Covid Period to be excluded as per decision of Supreme Court
