SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD UNN,UNN,SHAMLI vs. AO NFAC DELHI, NFAC NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4035/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 August 2025AY 2020-21Bench: MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER, SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA (Accountant Member)7 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the appeals to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to decide the issues afresh after allowing the assessee an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed two appeals against orders of the NFAC for A.Ys 2020-21 and 2022-23. The appeals were delayed due to the assessee's counsel being critically ill.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned due to sufficient cause, and if so, whether the appeal should be restored for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘G’ BENCH,

Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY, & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri J.N. Shukla, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Hearing: 07.08.2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 4035/DEL/2024
ITA No. 4056/DEL/2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

Representatives of both the sides were heard at length. Case records carefully perused. Relevant documentary evidence brought on record duly considered in light of Rule 18(6) of the ITAT Rules.

4.

At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee vehemently contended that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee without condoning the delay in filing the appeal. The ld. counsel for the assessee prayed for condonation of delay.

5.

Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.

6.

We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that there is a delay of 215 days. We also notice that the counsel of the assessee was critically ill and could not file the appeal. Hence the assessee was prevented from sufficient cause

Page 2 of 5 we restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay and admit the appeal for fresh adjudication after allowing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, The assessee is directed to produce all necessary documents as required by the ld. CIT(A).

7.

As a result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

8.

At the very outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the case of the assessee is covered by the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of Co-operative Cane Development Society order dated 05.06.2025 in ITA No. 5764/DEL/2025.

9.

On the other hand, the ld. DR relied upon the orders of the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A).

10.

We have heard the rival submissions and have perused the relevant material on record. We find that under similar circumstances and on identical facts, the co-ordinate bench [supra] has allowed the grounds Page 3 of 5 restore the appeal of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The ld. CIT(A) is directed to condone the delay and decide the issues afresh after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The assessee is directed to produce all necessary documents and evidences as required by the ld. CIT(A).

11.

As a result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

12.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in and 4056/DEL/2024 are allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 19.08.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →