SUNIL PAL,GHAZIABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3563/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 August 2026AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC, stating that technicalities should not impede substantial justice. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was filed with a delay of 37 days. The CIT(A)/NFAC refused to condone this delay, holding 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 on the grounds of substantial justice, despite the reasons not being considered justifiable by the lower appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

Hearing: 13.08.2026Pronounced: 13.08.2026

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2015-16, 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/250/2025-26/1084733184(1), dated 13.01.2026 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144

ITA No.3563/Del/2026

r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay of 37 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 04.05.2023 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 27.02.2023, 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, we hereby quote Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC),

2 | P a g e

ITA No.3563/Del/2026

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 CIT(A)/NFAC for its afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 13.08.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 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

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →