What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the appeal back to the Assessing Officer. This was done to allow the assessee a fresh adjudication with three effective opportunities of hearing, acknowledging potential communication gaps in virtual hearing mechanisms.

The assessee filed an appeal for AY 2017-18 with a significant delay of 877 days. The assessee claimed communication gaps prevented them from appearing and presenting facts in lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal, filed with a substantial delay, should be admitted and adjudicated on merits due to alleged communication gaps during lower appellate proceedings.

Jasmeet Singh, Karnal vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2026

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 03.08.2026Pronounced: 03.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3190/DEL/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Jasmeet Singh, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Kachwa Road, Ram Nagar, Ward- 1 Karnal- 132001 Aaykar Bhawan, Sector-12, Haryana Karnal, Haryana PAN: BCQPS5171R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Rakesh Jain, Adv. Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of hearing 03.08.2026 Date of pronouncement 03.08.2026 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, 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/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055537733(1), dated 29.08.2023 involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

ITA No.3190/Del/2026

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 877days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings; and; therefore, the matter may be restored back to the Assessing Officer. The Revenue vehemently supports the learned lower authority’s action making the addition(s) herein on merits.

Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance of the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism could not be altogether ruled out. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the

2 | P a g e

ITA No.3190/Del/2026

Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 03.08.2026.

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 19.08.2026 Pooja Mittal/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e

JASMEET SINGH,KARNAL vs. ITO WARD 1 KARNAL, KARNAL

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