BINAY KUMAR KHANDELWAL,GURGAON vs. ITO WARD 1(3), GURGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7464/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 September 2026AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and the AO, restoring the matter to the AO for a fresh decision after providing the assessee with a fair opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 142 days, claiming non-receipt of the order. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal due to the assessee's non-appearance despite multiple notices, following an ex-parte assessment order by the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the ex-parte orders should be set aside to allow the assessee a fresh hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI VIMAL KUMAR & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Adv. Sh. Sanjay Gupta, CA
For Respondent: Shri Tarun Sharda, Sr. DR
Hearing: 21.09.2026Pronounced: 21.09.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 7464/Del/2026, A.Y. 2016-17 Binay Kumar Khandelwal Vs. ITO, DX-154 Kendriya Vihar, Ward1(3), Sector 56, HSIIDC Building, Vanijya Gurgaon Nikunj, UdhyognVihar, Haryana Phase-V, Gurgaon Haryana �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AHQPK1136Q Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Sh. Shikher Garg, Adv. Sh. Sanjay Gupta, CA Sh. Surojeet Das, CA Respondent by : Shri Tarun Sharda, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 21.09.2026 Date of Pronouncement 21.09.2026

O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The application for condonation of delay of 142 days in filing appeal and the appeal filed by the assessee are against order dated 28.10.2025 of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 7464/Del/2026 Binay Kumar Khandelwal

as “the CIT(A)”] under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) arising out of separate assessment order dated 27.03.2024 of ld. Assessing Officer/ ITO, Ward 1(3), Gurgaon (hereinafter referred to as ‘the AO’) u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act for A.Y. 2016-17.

2.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that there is delay of 142 days in filing appeal due to non-receipt of impugned order. The appellant is non-resident Indian residing in USA since 2008. The explanation for condonation of delay does not smack of malafides, therefore, delay of 142 days in filing appeal is condoned.

3.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-appearance of assessee despite 3 notices. Ld. AO had passed ex parte assessment order. The matter may be restored to the file of Ld. AO.

4.

Ld. Departmental Representative relied on impugned orders.

5.

From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 28.10.2025 dismissed the appeal, since the assessee failed to appear despite issuance of 3 notices. Ld. AO had passed ex

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 7464/Del/2026 Binay Kumar Khandelwal

parte order. The appellant/assessee has claimed that he is Non-resident Indian residing in USA.

6.

In view of above material facts and in interest of justice, the impugned orders dated 28.10.2025 of Ld. CIT(A) and dated 27.03.2024 of Ld. AO are set aside and the matter is restored to the file of ld. AO for afresh decision in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the appellant/assessee.

7.

In the result, the application for condonation of delay of 142 days in filing the appeal is allowed and the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21.09.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY AWASTHI) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 23.09.2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →