BANK OF BARODA (E-VIJAYA BANK),DELHI vs. ADDL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-78(1), DELHI

ITA 1864/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 August 2026AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee, Bank of Baroda (e-Vijaya Bank), filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 671 days. The delay was attributed to misplaced penalty orders due to official transfers and the bank's centralized taxation process.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reasons provided for the delay were sufficient to condone it and admit the appeal. The CIT(A)'s order was set aside, and the matter was remitted back for fresh adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal was sufficiently caused, and whether the penalty was levied on a non-existent assessee due to a merger.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271C(1)(a),Section 221(1),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI

For Appellant: Smt. Lalitha, CA
For Respondent: Shri Balkrishan Gopal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 16.07.2026

PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal arises from order dated 04.12.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), by NFAC, Delhi.

2.

In this case, the Ld. AR pointed out that there was a delay in filing first appeal to the tune of 671 days. The Ld. AR requested that the reasons for delay were duly communicated to the Ld. CIT(A) but the same did not find any favour with him. The Ld. AR read the reasons for delay as mentioned on pages 2 & 3 of the impugned order:

"Your appellant craves leave of the id CIT(A) to condone the delay of 671 days in filing the appeal which

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 221(1)

All 159 judgments and leading authorities on Section 221(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →