PAWAN KUMAR GARG,DELHI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, CIVIC CENTRE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5467/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 August 20263 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), citing the need for substantive justice over technical considerations. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits after providing the appellant an opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay. The assessee argued that the delay was due to a bona fide mistake in interpreting the law and not an intention to evade tax, relying on a liberal approach for condonation of delay.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned to allow for a decision on the merits of the case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C” DELHI

Before: SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR & SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK

For Appellant: CA Ms Simran Kaur, CA
Hearing: 12.08.2026Pronounced: 20.08.2026

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH “C” DELHI BEFORE SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.5467/DEL/2026 Assessment Year: 2020-21 PAWAN KUMAR GARG Vs. ASSESSING OFFICER Onkar Nagar North West civic centre Delhi 11003 New Delhi PAN : ABXPG4666Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Sh. Dinesh Kumar Chitkara CA Ms Simran Kaur, CA Department by Sh. Raghubir Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing 12.08.2026 Date of pronouncement 20.08.2026

ORDER PER SUDHIR PAREEK, JM: The captioned appeal, challenging the order dated 17- 03-2026 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, Mumbai (herein referred as “CIT(A)), arising out of the order of the assessing officer dated 13-09-2021 pertaining to Assessment year 2020-21.

2.

At the outset, we noticed that the Learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant by stating that there is no any compelling circumstances beyond the control of the appellant to ensure and establish sufficient and reasonable cause to be considered for condonation of delay in question. The Learned AR submitted that the appellant acted in good faith on professional advice available to the relevant time and the incorrect claim was a bona fide mistake arising from interpretation of law and not a result of any intention to evade tax or suppress income.- It is also submitted that the appellant is a retired senior citizen lacks mala fide intention as delay in question mere procedural which is not affecting the merits of the case. It is also submitted that refusal to condone the delay would cause grave injustice. The Learned AR relied upon the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition versus Mst Katiji 167 ITR 471, in which held that while considering application for condonation of delay, should adopt a liberal and justice oriented approach so that substantial justice prevails over technical considerations.

3.

On the basis of above fact situation and to ensure the substantive justice, we inclined to condone the delay and remit back the issue to the Learned CIT(A), to decide the issue after providing effective and meaningful opportunity to appellant and simultaneously appellant is directed to cooperate in the proceedings. 4. Consequently, this appeal is hereby allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above. Order pronounced in the open court on 20/08/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (RAMIT KOCHAR) (SUDHIR PAREEK) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 20.08.2026. Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, DELHI

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →