TAJ PAL SINGH,MAWANA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2489/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 July 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal condoned both delays, citing the Collector Land Acquisition case and the Covid-19 period for the longer delay. It also noted the CIT(A)'s non-compliance with Section 250(6). Consequently, the appeal was set aside and remanded to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication, providing three effective opportunities of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an assessment order passed under Section 144, but faced significant delays in both the initial appeal to the CIT(A) (14 months 3 days) and the subsequent appeal to the ITAT (48 days). The CIT(A) had refused to condone the delay in the lower appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) and ITAT should be condoned, and the proper procedure for adjudication by the CIT(A) under Section 250(6).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 09.07.2025Pronounced: 09.07.2025

Asstt. Year : 2017-18 Taj Pal Singh, Vs ACIT, H. No. 82, Vill. Nasarpur, Mawana, Circle, Meerut, U.P.-240501 Meerut, U.P.-250002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. GTPPS7082L Assessee by: Sh. Rohit Agarwal, CA Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 09.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 09.07.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1071024607(1) dated 09.12.2024, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

Delay of 48 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

4.

It is noticed that the learned lower appellate authority has refused to condone the assessee’s 14 months 3 days delays in filing of the lower appeal instituted on 27.03.2021 against the assessment order dated 25.12.2019. That being the case, it is Taj Pal Singh manifestly clear that most of the intervening time period herein above is covered under Covid-19 pandemic outbreak upto 28.02.2022 which already stood excluded for all intents/purposes as per hon’ble apex court landmark decision Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, in Re (2022) 441 ITR 722 (SC).

5.

Faced with this situation and in light of the fact that the assessee has already explained the above period of delay of 14 months 3 days institution of the lower appeal, the same is hereby condoned going by Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

6.

This is indeed coupled with the facts that there is also no compliance to section 250(6) of the Act in the impugned lower appellate order stipulating points of determination to be framed followed by a detailed adjudication thereupon. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to set aside the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →