RAMESHWAR DASS,PANIPAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANIPAT

ITA 1747/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 June 2025AY 2017-20183 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 507 days in filing the appeal in the larger interest of justice, relying on the Supreme Court decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). The Tribunal acknowledged the possibility of communication gaps at various levels in such instances. Consequently, in the larger interest of justice, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to restore the assessee's appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A)/NFAC was directed to provide three effective opportunities of hearing to the appellant, at the appellant's risk and responsibility, for consequential proceedings. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sh. Rameshwar Dass, filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18 against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. This order was passed under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal was filed with a delay of 507 days. The assessee's counsel submitted that due to communication gaps, the assessee could not appear and present all relevant facts before the lower appellate authority. The Revenue supported the actions of the lower authorities. The Tribunal condoned the delay in the larger interest of justice.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 507 days in filing the appeal should be condoned in the interest of justice, considering the assessee's submission of communication gaps. (Question of fact and law, turning on principles of condonation of delay). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that communication gaps at various levels prevented them from appearing and presenting all relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings, and therefore, the matter should be restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC. The assessee relied on the Supreme Court decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) for condonation of delay. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue vehemently supported the action of the learned lower authorities, making additions on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 30.06.2025Pronounced: 30.06.2025

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, 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/250/2023-24/1054993370(1), dated 09.08.2023 involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

Delay of 507 days in filing the assessee’s instant appeal, is condoned in larger interest of justice and Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings, and, therefore, the matter may be restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC. The Revenue vehemently support the learned lower authorities action making addition(s) herein on merits.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →