AVHIKALPANA,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) WARD 1(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6388/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 August 2026AY 2023-243 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It was deemed appropriate in the interest of justice to restore the appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 187 days. The assessee's counsel argued that due to communication gaps in the lower appellate proceedings, they could not present all relevant facts. The Revenue supported the lower authorities' actions.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal should be restored to the lower appellate authority due to communication gaps during the proceedings.

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: 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. 6388/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Avhikalpana Vs. Income Tax Officer House No. 2, Ground Floor, (Exemption), Ward 1(1), Village-Singhola, Delhi New Delhi- 40 PAN: AAEAA9867A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Vibhu Gupta, 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 2023-24, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (for short, “CIT(A)/NFAC”), Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1080279235(1), dated 02.09.2025 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.

2.

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 187 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 144B

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →