VEER SINGH,MORADABAD vs. ITO WARD 1(1), MORADABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5274/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 July 2026AY 2023-242 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 restored the assessee's appeal to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. It emphasized that technicalities should not impede substantial justice, citing a Supreme Court judgment.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was dismissed due to a delay of 120 days in filing. The assessee had explained the delay due to circumstances beyond their control.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC was justified in refusing to condone the delay in filing the appeal without considering the reasons provided by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Pronounced: 07.07.2026

आदेश / ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2023-24, arises against the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi’s order in DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1087273050(1), dated 12.03.2026 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case filed perused. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay of 120 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 01.08.2025 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 04.03.2025 thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons.

ITA 5274/DEL/2026 VEER SINGH

3.

Faced with the situation, learned departmental representative could

hardly dispute that the assessee had indeed filed his condonation petition

before the CIT(A)/NFAC explaining all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond his control.

4.

That being the case, I hereby quote Collector, Land & Acquisition vs.

Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), settling the issue long back

that all such technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice, and restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the Assessing

Officer for his afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective

opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the

case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 7th July, 2026.

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 31st July, 2026. f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ f{x~{tÜ

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →