SUB-REGISTRAR OFFICE SIYANA,SIYANA vs. JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, I&CI, KANPUR

ITA 6467/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 September 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sub-Registrar Office Siyana, filed an appeal before the ITAT against an order dated 26.02.2025 passed by the NFAC, Delhi, under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal was filed with a delay of 191 days. The assessee had been subjected to a penalty of Rs. 85,700/- under Section 271FA for not filing a Statement of Financial Transaction within the prescribed time. The assessee's first appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed in limine on procedural grounds, specifically that a penalty under Section 271FA is not an appealable order before the CIT(Appeals). The assessee cited lack of in-house legal expertise and misdirection regarding further remedies as reasons for the delay.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 191 days in filing the appeal, accepting the assessee's explanation that the delay was unintentional and due to factors beyond their control, including lack of in-house legal expertise and misdirection following the CIT(A)'s dismissal. The Tribunal noted that a hyper-technical approach should not be adopted and substantial justice must prevail, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Collector, Land Acquisition Anantnag vs. Mst. Katiji. Regarding the penalty, the Tribunal, considering the provisions of Section 273B of the Act, held that the detailed reasons provided by the assessee for non-compliance, such as limited infrastructure and lack of knowledge, constituted 'reasonable cause'. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the deletion of the penalty imposed under Section 271FA. The issue of whether the penalty under Section 271FA was appealable before the CIT(Appeals) was implicitly addressed by the Tribunal admitting the appeal and proceeding to decide on merits, indicating a departure from the CIT(A)'s view.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 191 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal should be condoned, considering the reasons provided by the assessee (mixed law and fact, relying on Section 253(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the principle laid down in Collector, Land Acquisition Anantnag vs. Mst. Katiji). 2. Whether the penalty imposed under Section 271FA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for non-filing of the Statement of Financial Transaction within the prescribed time, is appealable before the CIT(Appeals) (question of law, relying on Section 271FA and Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961). 3. Whether the reasons provided by the assessee for non-compliance with the filing requirement constitute 'reasonable cause' under Section 273B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, warranting deletion of the penalty (mixed law and fact, relying on Section 273B). Assessee's arguments (as inferred from the delay condonation affidavit and the Tribunal's reasoning): The delay was unintentional and due to factors beyond control, including lack of legal expertise and misdirection after the CIT(A)'s dismissal. The CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on maintainability grounds. The reasons for non-compliance, such as limited infrastructure and lack of knowledge, constitute reasonable cause. Revenue's arguments: The Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271FA,Section 250,Section 253(3),Section 273B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Respondent: Shri Novel Roy, Sr. DR
Hearing: 07.09.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.6487/DEL/2026
ITA No.6467/DEL/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

In this case, there is a delay of 191 days which has been requested to be condoned through a detailed affidavit. The relevant portions from the said affidavit are extracted as under: -

1.

“That the Appellant has preferred an appeal in Form No.36 against the order dated 26.09.2025 passed by the Ld. ClT(Appeals) under Section 271FA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. That the impugned order of the CIT(A) was dated 26.09.2025, and accordingly, the prescribed period of two months in terms of Section 253(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (from the end of the month in which the order was communic

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 271FA

All 190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271FA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →