Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 arose from an order under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was filed with a delay, and the CIT(A)/NFAC refused to condone this delay without explaining justifiable reasons.
Held
The Tribunal restored the assessee's appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication. This decision was based on the principle that technicalities should give way to substantial justice, as established in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC was justified in refusing to condone the delay in filing the appeal without considering the reasons provided by the assessee.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. 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
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/250/2022-23/1049022452(1), dated 23.01.2023 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 04.03.2020 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 26.12.2019, thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons.
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.
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.