HPR TRANSPORTS LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6726/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 August 2026AY 2020-213 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

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

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC after a delay of 1070 days. The CIT(A)/NFAC refused to condone this delay, stating the reasons provided were not justifiable.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was sufficiently explained and should be condoned.

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: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 05.08.2026Pronounced: 05.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6726/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2020-21 HPR Transport Limited, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 80/15, Ghevra More, C.R. Building, ITO Delhi, Opposite IOC Gas Plant, New Delhi- 110 002 New Delhi- 81 PAN: AABCH0803N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Sumeet Khanna, CA Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of hearing 05.08.2026 Date of pronouncement 05.08.2026 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21, 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/250/2026-27/1088557594(1), dated 21.04.2026 involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

ITA No.6726/Del/2026

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 1070 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 01.10.2025 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 26.09.2022, 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, I hereby quote Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), 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

2 | P a g e

ITA No.6726/Del/2026

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 05.08.2026 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 11.08.2026 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 144B

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →