SEEMA ANAND,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 72(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2544/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 September 2026AY 2022-233 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) due to the reasonable cause presented. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for a denovo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed as time-barred due to a delay of 445 days. The assessee attributed the delay to their former CA not communicating the order and issues with their email ID.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was caused by a reasonable cause, and if so, whether the matter should be remanded for a fresh assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patwari, Advocate, Shri Akash Ojha, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Raghubir Singh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 15.07.2026Pronounced: 09.09.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2544/DEL/2026 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) Seema Anand, vs. ITO, Ward 72 (1), S-326, Greater Kailash, New Delhi. New Delhi - 110 048. (PAN : AAKPM9486A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Mayank Patwari, Advocate Shri Akash Ojha, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Raghubir Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 15.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 09.09.2026 O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM: 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [for short ‘ld. CIT (A)] dated 26.02.2026 for the Assessment Year 2022-23.

2.

At the outset, it was submitted by the ld. AR for the assessee that Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) without giving proper opportunity to the assessee. He submitted that ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal

2 ITA No.2544/Del/2026 being time barred. He further submitted that there was a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal in time before the ld. CIT (A). He pleaded that the delay before the ld. CIT (A) may be condoned and the matter may be restored to the file of AO.

3.

On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the order of the authorities below.

4.

Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Upon careful consideration, we noticed that the reasons for delay of 445 days are as under :-

(2) That I was required to file an appeal against the order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 22.03.2024 before Hon’ble CIT (A) within the prescribed period of 30 days. The delay in filing the appeal was caused by the following bona fide reasons :-  At the relevant time, my income tax matters were being handled by CA, Shailendra Prasad, Partner at RGSP & Company, who unfortunately did not communicate the about the orders passed. However, despite repeated follow-ups, the consultant failed to respond, leaving me unaware of the orders and thereby unable to initiate the appeal process within the prescribed time.  There was also an issue with the email ID used for department communication, which belonged to the former consultant and remained in accessible to me during the relevant period, resulting in missed updates and official correspondence. The email ID registered with the Income Tax Department was b3textiles@gmail.com.  I changed my consultant and promptly instructed by the new consultant about the lapse of filing an appeal against the order.

5.

After considering the above reasons, we find that the counsel for the assessee had not communicated to the assessee. Therefore, we condone the delay in

3 ITA No.2544/Del/2026 filing the appeal before the ld. CIT (A). We are also of the considered view that in the interest of justice, the matter requires denovo assessment. Therefore, we remit back the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Assessee is directed through his counsel to fully cooperate with the AO during the proceedings. We hold and direct accordingly.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on this 9TH day of September, 2026.

Sd/- sd/- (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated: 09.09.2026 TS

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →