DEVENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,BULANDSHAHR vs. ITO, BULANDSHAHR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6326/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 August 2026AY 2011-123 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 and restored the appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication. This was due to potential communication gaps in the virtual hearing mechanism.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for AY 2011-12 against an order passed under section 147/143(3). The assessee sought condonation for a significant delay in filing the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be restored to the lower appellate authority due to communication gaps and the assessee's inability to present all facts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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. 6326/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Devendra Kumar Sharma Vs. Income Tax Officer, Village-Gahna, Teachers Colony Jahangirabad, Bulandshahar- 203001 Bulandshahar-203001 PAN: AABFA1282H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Pulkit Saini, 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 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (for short, “CIT(A)/NFAC”), Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1075167004(1), dated 28.03.2025 involving proceedings under section 147/143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 368 days in filing of the instant appeal is

condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3.

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 CIT(A)/NFAC. The Revenue vehemently supports the learned lower authorities’ action making the addition(s) herein on merits.

4.

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 CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. 2 | P a g e

5.

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: 10.08.2026 Pooja Mittal, Sr. PS 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 →