HARYANA GRAMIN BANK,ROHTAK vs. ACIT CIRCLE, ROHTAK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6832/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 September 2026AY 2016-175 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that a ground of appeal had indeed remained un-adjudicated in the CIT(A)'s previous order. Consequently, the CIT(A)'s rejection of the rectification application was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee bank filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order refusing to adjudicate a ground on merits in a rectification proceeding. There was a delay of 22 days in filing the appeal, attributed to the demise of the assessee's tax consultant.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in refusing to adjudicate a ground on merits in a rectification order when it was not adjudicated in the quantum appeal. Whether an ad-hoc disallowance of expenditure was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 250,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri K V S Krishna, CA
For Respondent: Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, CIT-DR
Hearing: 17.09.2026Pronounced: 17.09.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 6832/Del/2026, A.Y. 2016-17 Haryana Gramin Bank Vs. ACIT, M/s. Haryana Gramin Bank, Circle, Plot No. 1, Rohtak Sector-3, Rohtak H.O.Para (PART)(67), Rohtak, Rohtak PAN: AAKAS1464M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri K V S Krishna, CA Sh. Aman Goel, CA Respondent by : Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 17.09.2026 Date of Pronouncement 17.09.2026

O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The application for condonation of delay of 22 days in filing appeal and the appeal filed by the assessee are against the order dated 31.03.2026 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 6832Del/2026 Haryana Gramin Bank

(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for rectification order dated 31.03.2023 u/s 154 r.w.s. 250 of the Act in arising out of assessment order dated 27.12.2019 of the Ld. Assessing officer / ACIT, Circle, Rohtak (hereinafter referred to as ‘the AO’) u/s 143(3) of the Act for A.Y.2016- 17.

2.

The appellant/ assessee raised following grounds:

“1. Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in passing order u/s 154/250 refusing to adjudicate ground on merits which was not adjudicated in quantum appeal which is wrong and bad in law.

2.

The appellant contends that the ad-hoc disallowance of Other Expenditure to the extent of Rs. 3,82,95,503/- by estimating the increase in such expenditure @3% to the expenditure of last year i.e. F.Y. 2014-15 by disregarding actual expenditure incurred is wrong and bad in law. The ad-hoc disallowance made without any basis deserves to be deleted.

3.

The above grounds are independent to each other. The appellant reserves the right to modify, alter, amend, or add further grounds of appeal at the time of the hearing.”

3.

Ld. Counsel for appellant/assessee submitted that there is delay of 22 days in filing appeal due to demise of tax consultant of assessee Sh. Vivek

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 6832Del/2026 Haryana Gramin Bank

Gupta. The explanation does not smack of malafides, therefore, delay of 22 days in filing appeal is condoned.

4.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) erred in not rectifying the order dated 30.03.2023 despite original ground No. 6 remaining un-adjudicated and escaped consideration.

5.

Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the matter be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A).

6.

From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that ground No. 6 remained un-adjudicated and escaped consideration in order dated 30.03.2023 of ld. CIT(A), therefore, the application for rectification of order has been wrongly rejected vide impugned order dated 31.03.2026. The order dated 31.03.2026 of ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for afresh decision in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the appellant/assessee.

P a g e | 4 ITA No. 6832Del/2026 Haryana Gramin Bank

7.

In the result, the application for condonation of delay of 22 days in filing appeal is allowed and the appeal filed by the appellant/assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17.09.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 18.09.2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

P a g e | 5 ITA No. 6832Del/2026 Haryana Gramin Bank

Date of dictation of Tribunal order 17.09.2026 1. 2. Date on which typed draft order is placed before 18.09.2026 the dictating Member 3 Date on which typed draft order is placed before the other Member (in the case of DB) 4. Date on which the approved draft order comes to P.S/Sr.P.S 5. Date on which the fair Order is placed before the dictating Member for sign 6. Date on which the fair Order is placed before the other Member for sign ( in the case of DB) 7. Date on which the Order comes back to P.S./Sr.P.S for uploading on ITAT website 8. Date of uploading, if not, reason for not uploading 9. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 10. Date on which order goes for xerox 11. Date on which order goes for endorsement 12. Date on which the file goes to the Superintendent/O.S. for checking 13. Date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 14. Date on which the file goes to dispatch section for dispatch the Tribunal Order 15. Date of dispatch of order 16. Date on which file goes to Record Room after dispatch the order

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →