DIPAKSHI KHAIRA,NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH vs. DCIT, NOIDA, UTTAR PRADESH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4195/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 August 2025AY 2015-2016Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that technical aspects should yield to substantial justice, referencing the Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others case. The assessee's appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2015-16 arose against an order by the CIT(A)/NFAC which refused to condone a delay of 142 days in filing the assessee's lower appeal. The CIT(A)/NFAC held that the delay was not explained by justifiable reasons.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the lower appellate authority was sufficiently explained to warrant condonation, and whether technicalities should prevail over substantial justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: CA Sh. Vipin, CA
Hearing: 18.08.2025Pronounced: 18.08.2025

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2015-16, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1076295396(1), dated 19.05.2025 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the both the parties that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay of 142 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 23.08.2023 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 04.03.2023, thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons.

3.

Faced with the situation, learned departmental representative could hardly dispute that the assessee had indeed filed his condonation petition before the CIT(A)/NFAC explaining all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond his control.

4.

That being the case, I hereby quote Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), settling the issue long back that all such technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice, and restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

6.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 18th August, 2025

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →