What did the Tribunal hold?

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

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay in filing, which the CIT(A) refused to condone. The assessee had filed a condonation petition explaining circumstances beyond their control.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned to allow for substantial justice. The issue of whether the assessment proceedings themselves were correct was not directly addressed.

Baba Ram Das Educational and… vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2026

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

For Appellant: Adv. &, Ms. Riya Jindal, Adv

Hearing: 08.07.2026Pronounced: 08.07.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 5458/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2015-16

BABA RAM DAS Vs. Income Tax Officer EDUCATIONAL AND (Exemptions), WELFARE SOCIETY, Rohtak VPO NUNA MAJRA, NEAR BALMIKI CHOPAL, BAHADURGARH, H.O. BAHADURGARH, JHAJJAR-124507 PAN: AABAB9474D) (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by Sh. Abdullah Mustaqueem, Adv. & Ms. Riya Jindal, Adv. Department by Sh. Nirmal Nangia, Sr. DR. Date of hearing 08.07.2026 Date of pronouncement 08.07.2026

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2015-16, arises

against the order of Addl/JCIT(A)-1 Nashik [in short, the “CIT(A)],

dated 17.03.2026 involving proceedings under section 143(1) of the

Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able

assistance coming from both the parties that the learned

CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay in filing of the

assessee’s lower appeal against the Assessing Officer’s assessment

proceedings, thereby holding that the same had not been explained

in light of the justifiable reasons.

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.

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. Accordingly, it is therefore deemed appropriate in the

larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal

back to the Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate

adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the

appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings.

Ordered accordingly.

2 | P a g e

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 8th July, 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

BABA RAM DAS EDUCATIONAL AND WELFARE SOCIETY,BAHADURGARH vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), ROHTAK

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