RAKESH,GAAUTAM BUDDHA NAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 5(3)(1), NOIDA

ITA 3372/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 July 2026AY 2017-183 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(A) which had dismissed the appeal due to the unexplained and inordinate delay. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a significant delay of 2064 days. No explanation was provided for this delay, and consequently, the CIT(A) did not condone it. The assessee also failed to appear before the ITAT or provide any explanation for the delay.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the appeal filed before the CIT(A) should be admitted despite a substantial delay and lack of explanation. The Tribunal also considered the assessee's non-appearance and lack of engagement.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: MS MADHUMITA ROY

For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Hearing: 14/05/2026Pronounced: 15/07/2026

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ITA No. 3372/Del/2026 (A.Y 2017-18) Rakesh Vs. Income Tax Officer, Birampur, Rabupura, Ward- 5(3)(1)Aayakar Bhawan, Gautam Budh Nagar, A-2D, Sector 24, (Gautam Budh Uttar Pradesh Nagar), Nodia, Uttar Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: APJPR9844P

Assessee by : None Revenue by: Shri Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 14/05/2026 Date of pronouncement 15/07/2026 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, J. M.: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the

order dated 06.01.2026 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-

tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter

referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)/’NFAC’] under Section 250 of the

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out

of the Assessment Order dated 28.12.2019 passed by the

Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department (hereinafter referred to as

‘the ld. AO’) under Section 147 read with section 144 of the Income

Tax Act for Assessment Year 2017-18.

Notice has been sent. None appeared on behalf of the Assessee,

nor any adjournment been sought for despite service of notice.

Under these facts and circumstances we have decided to proceed

with the matter its merits.

2 ITA No. 3372/Del/2026 Rakesh Vs. ITO 3. It appears from the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) rejecting the

appeal preferred by the Assessee that there was delay of 2064 days

in filing the appeal before the said authority, in support of which no

explanation has been rendered by the Assessee and therefore, the

delay was not condoned. Even before us, no explanation of

condonation of delay in preferring the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) has

been filed, thus, having regard to this particular aspect of the matter

we find that the Assessee is not interested in moving of the appeal.

In the absence of any explanation rendered by the Assessee the

delay having not been condoned by the Ld. CIT(A), under these

particular facts and circumstances, seems to be correct and

therefore, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is upheld.

The appeal preferred by the Assessee is thus, dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 15/07/2026.

Sd/- (MADHUMITA ROY) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 15/07/2026 R. Naheed, Sr PS

3 ITA No. 3372/Del/2026 Rakesh Vs. ITO Copy forwarded to

Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →