PRITI KUMARI,MOHINDERGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, REWARI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC, emphasizing that technicalities should not impede substantial justice. The appeal was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was filed with a delay of 1 month and 10 days. The CIT(A)/NFAC refused to condone this delay, stating that the reasons provided were not justifiable.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC should be condoned, considering the principles of substantial justice over technicalities.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
P a g e | 1 ITA No.7628/Del/2026 Priti Kumari (AY: 2013-14) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.7628/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2013-14
Priti Kumari Vs. Income Tax Officer, Village- Shyampura, Ward 2, Mohindergarh, Model Town, Rewari, Mahendergarh Haryana – 123401 Haryana – 123024 PAN: JIPPK9435P (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by None Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 20.08.2026 Date of pronouncement 20.08.2026 ORDER
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14, 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/APL/S/250/2023-24/1057345635(1), dated 26.10.2023 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
P a g e | 2 ITA No.7628/Del/2026 Priti Kumari (AY: 2013-14) 2. 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 of 1 Month and 10 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 04.06.2022 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 25.03.2022, thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons. 3. 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. 4. 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. Accordingly, the delay caused in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC is condoned and the assessee’s instant appeal is restored back to the AO for his afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at her own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.
P a g e | 3 ITA No.7628/Del/2026 Priti Kumari (AY: 2013-14) 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 20th August, 2026
Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 14th September, 2026. Rohit, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Laxman Singh Yadav vs. Bank Of BarodaMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Surendra Singh Rathore vs. Idfc First Bank Through Branch ManagerMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026