MICRON INSTRUMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEAL), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC)

The assessee has filed an application dated 09.03.2026 seeking condonation of delay of 588 days in filing the present appeal. The contents of the application are reproduced as under:

We have considered the contents of the condonation application and the submissions made by the ld. AR. We find that the assessee has satisfactorily explained the reasons for the delay. In view of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), wherein it has been held that a liberal approach should be adopted while considering applications for condonation of delay to substantial justice, we

We have heard the ld. AR and the ld. DR. The ld. AR at the very outset submitted that impugned order has been passed ex-parte by the learned CIT(A) without affording adequate and effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was further submitted that the e-mail address and mobile number registered on the e-filing portal were being handled by a junior secretary, who inadvertently failed to forward the notices and communications to the concerned person. Consequently, the assessee could not effectively represent his case either before the Assessing Officer or before the ld. CIT(A). It was, therefore, contended that the impugned order is in violation of the mandate contained in section 250(6) of the Act. It was, therefore, prayed that the matter be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after affording an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The ld. DR supported the impugned order and submitted that despite several opportunities having been granted by the learned CIT(A), the assessee failed to respond to the notices

We have considered the rival submissions and examined the material on record. It is an admitted fact that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal primarily on account of non- prosecution. Hence, the points raised in the appeal before us regarding the appellate order having been passed against the assessee without bringing the factual matrix on record is a material illegality which needs to be considered by the ld. Lower Authority as per law. On perusal of the impugned order, we have noticed that there is nothing brought on record to show that the notices sent to the assessee/appellant were duly served upon him or received by him. Section 250(2)(a) lays down as under:

In view of the above facts and circumstances, it is evident that the impugned order has been passed ex-parte without

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 07/08/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Ramit Kochar) (Raj Kumar Chauhan) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 07/08/2026 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR