SUNIL KUMAR,REWARI, HARYANA vs. IT0 WARD 2, REWARI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3253/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 August 2026AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay due to the affidavit filed by the assessee. Considering the assessee is an individual and to provide an opportunity to contest on merits, the impugned order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a significant delay of 696 days, citing loss of documents by their professional. The assessee also failed to appear before the Assessing Officer and the First Appellate Authority.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the assessee should be given an opportunity to contest the case on merits after ex-parte orders were passed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SMT. RENU JAUHRI

For Respondent: Shri Rubal Singh, Sr. DR
Pronounced: 03.08.2026

PER SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29.02.2024 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1061715052(1) arising out of the order dated 30.03.2022 u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by NaFAC, Delhi for AY: 2014-15.

2.

On hearing both sides at the outset we find that appeal has been filed before this

ITA 3253/DEL/2026 SUNIL KUMAR

Tribunal with a delay of 696 days and application for condonation of delay along with affidavit has been filed deposing that as the professional representing the assesse had lost relevant papers and documents, the assesse could not file the appeal in the limitation period. Considering facts are deposed in the form of affidavit, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.

3.

Further, on hearing we find that the impugned order has been passed by ld. AO u/s 144 of the Act and before ld. CIT(A) also assesse had failed to appear and ld. AR has cited similar reason that the professional representing the assesse had not put in appearance in spite of instructions. Considering that assesse is an individual we consider it appropriate case to give assesse an opportunity to contest on merits.

4.

As a consequence of above, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. The impugned order are set aside and issues are restored to files of ld. AO to given fresh opportunity of hearing to the assesse and to pass order afresh.

Order pronounced in the open court on 03.08.2026

Sd/- Sd/- RENU JAUHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Delhi Dated: 07.08.2026

ITA 3253/DEL/2026 SUNIL KUMAR

Copy to: SUNIL KUMAR, 78, ALAWAL PUR, NANDRAMPUR BASS, 1 DHARUHERA, REWARI-123106, HARYANA

IT0 WARD 2, 2 REWARI, REWARI-123401, HARYANA

3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, DELHI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →