SURAJN PRAKASH RAWAL,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8298/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 June 2026AY 2016-172 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) to provide the assessee an opportunity to explain the delay. The CIT(A) was directed to decide the condonation petition and, if admitted, adjudicate the grounds afresh.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a 77-day delay in filing. The assessee argued that no opportunity was given to explain the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without providing an opportunity to explain the delay in filing. The primary issue is the condonation of delay in filing the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri P. P. singh, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 29/06/2026Pronounced: 30/06/2026

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 8298/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Surajn Prakash Rawal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 205, Ram Vihar, Anand Ward-59(3), Vihar, East Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAAPR1319K

Assessee by : Shri P. P. singh, Adv Revenue by: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 29/06/2026 Date of pronouncement 30/06/2026

O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in ITA No. 8298/Del/2025 for AY 2016-17, arises out of the order of the ld National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 13.10.2025 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 11.03.2024 by the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).

2.

At the outset, we find that the ld CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal as not maintainable by not condoning the delay in filing of appeal by the assessee by 77 days. The ld AR before us submitted that no opportunity in this regard was even given by the ld CIT(A) seeking explanation for the delay. The ld AR prayed for one opportunity to be given to the assessee explain the reasons for the delay in filing of appeal before the ld CIT(A). Hence, in the interest of justice and fairplay, we deem it fit and appropriate, to restore this appeal to the file of the ld CIT(A). The assessee is directed to explain the reasons for delay in filing of appeal before the ld CIT(A). The ld CIT(A) if it deems fit on Page | 1

ITA No. 8298/Del/2025 Surajn Prakash Rawal

consideration of the condonation petition may decide to admit the appeal and if so admitted shall adjudicate the grounds raised before him afresh. With these observations the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes by restoring to the file of the ld CIT(A).

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 30/06/2026.

-Sd/- -Sd/- (VIMAL KUMAR) (M. BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 30/06/2026 A K Keot Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →