https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465729 The dominant issue was whether the first appellate authority wrongly refused to entertain the appeal by miscomputing limitation for an appeal against intimation under s. 143(1). The Tribunal held that the actual, undisputed delay in filing before the CIT(A) was only four days, and the finding of a 551-day delay was erroneous. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded to the CIT(A) to decide the condonation request afresh in accordance with law, applying the SC's approach; if delay is condoned, the CIT(A) must adjudicate the appeal on merits. en-us Thu, 02 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jan 2026 18:47:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465729 The dominant issue was whether the first appellate authority wrongly refused to entertain the appeal by miscomputing limitation for an appeal against intimation under s. 143(1). The Tribunal held that the actual, undisputed delay in filing before the CIT(A) was only four days, and the finding of a 551-day delay was erroneous. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded to the CIT(A) to decide the condonation request afresh in accordance with law, applying the SC's approach; if delay is condoned, the CIT(A) must adjudicate the appeal on merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 02 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465729