What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC, citing the principle of substantial justice over technicalities. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC with a delay of 540 days. The CIT(A)/NFAC refused to condone this delay, stating the reasons provided were not justifiable.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC should be condoned, considering the reasons provided by the assessee.

Vinay Kumar Singal, Gurugram vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 30.06.2026Pronounced: 30.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4260/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vinay Kumar Singal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, H. No. 702, Block B-1, Ward-4(5), Unitech the Residences, Gurgaon Sector-33, Gurugram -122 003 PAN: ADLPS4327G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by None Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of hearing 30.06.2026 Date of pronouncement 30.06.2026 ORDER

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)- 4, Delhi’s order dated 18.02.2026 having DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1086167082(1), involving proceedings under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

ITA No.4260/Del/2026

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay of 540 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 18.08.2021 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 24.12.2019, thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons. 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. Accordingly, the delay caused in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC is condoned and the assessee’s instant appeal is restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall

2 | P a g e

ITA No.4260/Del/2026

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 30th June, 2026 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 22nd July, 2026. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e

VINAY KUMAR SINGAL,GURUGRAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(5), GURGAON

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments