Priyanka Dornala vs. ITO, Ward-9(1)

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Priyanka Dornala, filed two appeals against two separate orders dated 29.10.2025 passed by the learned CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising from penalty orders under sections 271(1)(c) and 271F of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2015-2016. The assessee, an NRI residing in the USA, had a delay of 21 days in filing the appeals due to her inability to follow up on tax matters personally. The assessee's father, a senior citizen, was managing her tax affairs. The Department of Revenue (DR) objected to the condonation of delay, stating that the assessee was negligent as there was a delay of 133 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The Tribunal considered the submissions and found reasonable cause for the delay, condoning the 21-day delay and admitting the appeals for adjudication.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the delay in filing the appeals is justified and should be condoned?
• 2. Whether the penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act is leviable?
• 3. Whether the appeal against the penalty under section 271F of the Act should be dismissed as not pressed?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Damyanti Atul Shah v/s Income Tax Officer, Ward – 20(1)(1)

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2013-14Allowed

• Subramaniam Suresh Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(6), Salem

• Ankur Ramesh Vahi vs. ITO

  Delhi Bench 'E' benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• Satbir Singh Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Panipat

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2010-11Allowed

• The Hisar Leading Bank Co-op Non-Agri Thrift & Credit Society vs ITO, Ward 1, Hisar

  Delhi Bench ‘E’, New Delhi benchAY 2014-15Allowed

• Bina Ghosh vs Income Tax Officer

  Mumbai Bench benchAY 2016-17Allowed