What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A) and decided to give the assessee another opportunity to present her case on merits.

The assessee filed appeals before the CIT(A) with significant delays, which were dismissed without condonation. The CIT(A) noted that the assessee claimed no delay and provided no reasons for it.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) should be condoned to allow the appeals to be heard on merits.

Chameli, Jind, Haryana vs ITO | ITAT Chandigarh 2026

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

Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA

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

Hearing: 06.07.2026Pronounced: 14.07.2026

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण,च�डीगढ़ �यायपीठ, च�डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 1385 & 1386/CHD/2026 �नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Chameli, The ITO, VPO-Amarkheri, Vs Ward 1, Tehsil & Distt. – Jind, Jind. Haryana. �थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BAWPC7531H अपीलाथ�/Appellant ��यथ�/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 06.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 14.07.2026 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R 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 13.03.2026 passed for assessment year 2015-16. Both the 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 787 days in ITA No. 1385/CHD/2026 and 584 days in ITA No.

ITA 1385 & 1386/CHD/2026 2

1386/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.CIT (Appeals) has recorded a finding that in Form 35, the

assessee has stated that there is no delay in filing the appeal and the

assessee has not given any reason for delay in filing the appeal. The ld.

counsel for the assessee has requested that the delay in filing the appeal

before ld.CIT (Appeals) be condoned and the appeals be taken up on merits.

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 facts and circumstances

of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee should be

given one more opportunity to present her case and therefore, delay is

required to be condoned. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the

appeals before the ld. CIT (Appeals), in both the appeals.

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

to the file of the ld.CIT (Appeals), with direction to decide the appeal on merit.

Needless to say, the ld.CIT (Appeals) will pass a speaking and well-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. The assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh

proceedings before the CIT(A).

ITA 1385 & 1386/CHD/2026 3

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

CHAMELI,JIND, HARYANA vs. ITO WARD-1, JIND, HARYANA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments