What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before it and before the CIT(A) due to genuine reasons, including the Covid pandemic. The matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration of the issues.

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was filed belatedly by 667 days. The assessee also faced a delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). Both lower authorities had passed ex-parte orders.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT and CIT(A) should be condoned. Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the lower authorities warrant a fresh adjudication.

Mahabir, Panipat vs ITO | s.250 | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri Navdeep Moga, Adv (VC)

For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr

Hearing: 02/09/2026Pronounced: 14/09/2026

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6124/Del/2026 (A.Y 2017-18) Mahabir Vs. Income Tax Officer-cum Jurisdictional Officer, Village Kawi, VPO Kawi Ward-2, Panipat Panna. Panipat-132113 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: CKIPM1627H Assessee by : Shri Navdeep Moga, Adv (VC) Revenue by: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02/09/2026 Date of pronouncement 14/09/2026

O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the

order dated 16.05.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-

tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi under Section

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’)

arising out of the Assessment Order dated 01.10.2019 passed by the

Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department under Section 143 of the

Act for Assessment Year 2017-18.

The instant appeal filed by the assessee is found to be barred by

limitation for about 667 days in support of which an application for

condonation of delay has already been filed. We have gone through

2 ITA No. 6124/Del/2026 Mahabir Vs. ITO

the same and the reason assigned for filing the appeal belatedly seems

to be genuine and, therefore, the delay is condoned.

We have heard the parties, perused the records.

It was also pointed out by the Ld. DR that before the Ld. CIT(A)

the appeal was filed belatedly and it was submitted by the Ld. AR that

due to Covid pandemic, in such delay caused in filing the appeal

before the Ld. CIT(A) which in our considered opinion seems to be

genuine and, therefore, we condone the delay in filing the said appeal

before the Ld. CIT(A) too. Further considering this particular aspect

of the matter that both the authorities below have passed orders ex-

parte and particularly considering the submission made by the Ld.

AR, we dispose of this appeal by remanding the issue to the file of the

Ld. CIT(A) for consideration of the same afresh. The appeal is directed

to be completed within a period of 8 months from the date of passing

of this order today by the Ld. CIT(A). We also make it clear that in the

event the assessee does not co-operate that the authorities below, the

said authority would be at liberty to proceed and finalize the issue

strictly in accordance with law.

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for

statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 14/09/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

3 ITA No. 6124/Del/2026 Mahabir Vs. ITO

Dated: 14/09/2026 R. Naheed, Sr PS

MAHABIR,PANIPAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANIPAT

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments