SUDHA KAPOOR,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the matter requires a fresh assessment. The issues were remitted back to the Assessing Officer to decide afresh after giving the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal against the assessment order was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a delay in filing, without condoning the delay or substantively dealing with the grounds of appeal. The assessee argued that they were not given a proper opportunity to be heard.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without condoning the delay and providing a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.8269/DEL/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Sudha Kapoor, vs. ITO, Ward 49 (1), C/o Rachna Batra, New Delhi. BB-11A, Janakpuri, New Delhi – 110 058. (PAN : BPBPK4908L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri H.C. Parashar, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Yashvendra Singh, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 23.06.2026 Date of Order : 23.06.2026 O R D E R PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM: 1. The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 13.10.2025 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At the outset, it was submitted by the ld. AR for the assessee that Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) without giving proper opportunity to the assessee. He further submitted that there was a delay of 117 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal without
2 ITA No.8269/DEL/2025 condoning the delay. He submitted that ld. CIT (A) ought to have dealt with the grounds of appeal substantively even if the delay was not condoned or at least provided a detailed finding on the sufficiency of the cause of delay. He submitted that there are reasons for assessee for not appearing before the first appellate authority. Accordingly, he prayed that this issue may be remitted back to AO, with the prayer to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 3. Ld. DR relied upon the order of the authorities below. 4. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Upon careful consideration, we are of the considered view that in the interest of justice, the matter requires denovo assessment. Therefore, we remit back the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, for which Ld. DR has no objection. Assessee is directed through his counsel to fully cooperate with the AO during the proceedings. We hold and direct accordingly. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 23RD day of June, 2026 after the conclusion of the hearing.
Sd/- sd/- (VIMAL KUMAR) (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 27.07.2026 TS
3 ITA No.8269/DEL/2025
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026