What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A) after considering the assessee's reasons. The matter was then remitted back to the Assessing Officer for a decision on merits.

The assessee filed appeals before the CIT(A) with significant delays. The CIT(A) dismissed these appeals without condoning the delay. The assessee requested condonation of delay before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A) should be condoned. The secondary issue was the subsequent adjudication of the appeal on merits.

Harmaninder Singh Brar, Kharar… vs ITO | ITAT Chandigarh 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Shubhanshu Jolly, CA, Ayush Garg, CA, Shri Shuham Monga, CA

For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR

Hearing: 06.07.2026Pronounced: 14.07.2026

PER LALIET KUMAR, JM

The assessee has filed both the appeals before the Tribunal against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 26.02.2026 passed for assessment year 2013-14. Both the

ITA 1137 & 1155/CHD/2026 2

appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

It is pointed out by the ld. counsel for the assessee that there is a delay of 707 days in ITA No. 1137/CHD/2026 and 881 days in ITA No. 1155/CHD/2026 in filing the appeals before the ld.CIT (Appeals). The ld.CIT (Appeals) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee without condoning the delay. The ld. counsel for the assessee has drawn our attention to the reasons given before the ld.CIT (Appeals) and has requested that the delay in filing the appeal before ld.CIT (Appeals) be condoned.

The ld. DR has relied upon the order of the ld.CIT (Appeals).

We have heard the rival contentions of the parties and perused the material available on record. After considering the reasons given by the assessee in the application, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in not filing the appeals well within the time limit before ld.CIT (Appeals) and the delay is required to be condoned. Accordingly, we condone the delay occurred in filing the appeals before ld. CIT (Appeals), in both the appeals.

ITA 1137 & 1155/CHD/2026 3

In view of the above, we deem it appropriate to remit the

matter back to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer, with direction

to decide the appeal on merit. Needless to say, the ld. AO will

pass a speaking and reasoned order after affording a reasonable

opportunity of hearing to the assessee by issuing notice and

calling for the evidence, if any, filed by the assessee, in

accordance with law.

However, while granting this indulgence, we consider it

appropriate to impose costs of Rs. 5,000/- in each case upon the

assessee for its non-cooperative conduct before the authorities

below. The said amounts shall be deposited by the assessee with

the PGI Poor Patients Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh, within

30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The proofs of such

deposits shall be furnished before the Assessing Officer at the

commencement of the remand proceedings. Subject to the

aforesaid condition, the Assessing Officer shall decide the matter

afresh in accordance with law after providing a reasonable

opportunity of hearing. The assessee is also directed to extend full

cooperation and furnish all documentary evidence and

explanations as may be called for by the Assessing Officer. Since

the matter is being restored, we refrain from expressing any

ITA 1137 & 1155/CHD/2026 4

opinion on the merits of the additions or the legal grounds raised

in the appeal, and leave all such issues open for adjudication

afresh.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 14.07.2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) (LALIET KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER “Poonam” आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 2. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 3. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 4. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File 5.

सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar

HARMANINDER SINGH BRAR,KHARAR, PUNJAB vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(1), MOHALI, PUNJAB

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments