SUKRITI SAHNI,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-28(1), DELHI

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

It is noticed at the outset that the learned lower appellate authority has refused to condone the assessee’s 771 days delays in filing of the lower appeal instituted on 22.02.2022 against the assessment order dated 07.12.2019. That being the case, it is manifestly clear that most of the intervening time period herein above is covered under Covid-19 pandemic Sukriti Sahni 2 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).

Faced with this situation and in light of the fact that the assessee has already explained the above period of delay of 771 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).

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. Sukriti Sahni 3 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 13/05/2025. (Satbeer Singh Godara)