What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the NFAC should have given the assessee an opportunity to explain the delay and file an application for condonation of delay before dismissing the appeal. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes to provide this opportunity.

The assessee's appeal against the order of the NFAC was dismissed in limine without condoning a delay of 87 days, and the assessee was not show-caused. The NFAC, as the First Appellate Authority, is expected to act as a quasi-judicial authority.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine without condoning the delay and without providing the assessee an opportunity to be heard on the delay.

Reeta Devi, Faridabad vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2025

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES: G : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

For Respondent: Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. DR

Hearing: 24.06.2025Pronounced: 24.06.2025

Assessment Year: 2020-21 Reeta Devi, Vs ITO, House No.56, Ward 2(1), Sector 84, Faridabad. Kheri Kalan B.O., Faridabad. PAN: COQPD3122N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 24.06.2025 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 07.03.2025 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi.

None appeared for the assessee during the hearing. Heard and perused the records. We find that although the assessee has raised issues on merits before the NFAC, the appeal has been dismissed in limine without condoning the delay of 87 days. We further find that the assessee was not show-caused for the same. The NFAC as the First Appellate Authority is supposed to pass orders as a quasi

REETA DEVI,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD -2(1), FARIDABAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments