AMIT JAIN,DELHI vs. WARD 59(5), DELHI, DELHI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: "SMC" NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.1592/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Sh. Amit Jain, | Vs. | ITO, Ward-59(5), H. No. 120, 1st Floor, | Delhi Bahubali Enclave, Karkardooma, New Delhi PAN: AKPPJ2707C (Appellant) | (Respondent)

Assessee by | None Department by | Sh. Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Sr. Dr.

Date of hearing | 03.06.2025 Date of pronouncement | 03.06.2025

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/250/2024-25/1072256404(1), dated 17.01.2025 involving proceedings under section 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').

- 3. It emerges during the course of hearing that learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay of 212 days in filing of the lower appeal instituted on 24.04.2022 against the Assessing Officer's penalty order u/s 271B dated 23.08.2021, thereby holding him to have failed in submitting any justifiable reasons thereof. - 4. That being the case, the Revenue could hardly dispute that the majority of the intervening time period between the above Assessing Officer's processing and the date of the institution of the assessee's lower appeal already stands covered under the covid-19 pandemic outbreak period from 15th March, 2020 to 28th February, 2022 in the light of (2022) 441 ITR 722 in Cognizance for Exclusion of Limitation, In Re. - 5. This is indeed coupled with the fact that he had sought to explain before the learned CIT(A)/NFAC that the impugned processing had also not been received in the intervening time period. Be that as it may, it is deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to condone the foregoing delay of 212 days in the light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) and the assessee's instant appeal is restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for its afresh appropriate