IHD HOTELS & RESORTS,DELHI vs. WARD 43(6) - DELHI, DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication. This was done in the interest of justice, acknowledging the possibility of communication gaps.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for AY 2020-21 was filed with a delay of 124 days. The assessee contended that due to communication gaps, they could not present all relevant facts before the lower appellate authority.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be restored to the lower appellate authority due to communication gaps preventing proper presentation of facts. The delay in filing the appeal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3725/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2020-21 IHD Hotels & Resorts, Vs. ITO, 817, Pearl Omaxe Tower, Ward-43(6), Saraswati Vihar, Delhi New Delhi -110034 PAN: AAGFI4570D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Sombir Singh, CA Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 01.06.2026 Date of pronouncement 01.06.2026 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2020-21, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1080470178(1), dated 09.09.2025 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 124 days in filing of the instant appeal is
ITA No.3725/Del/2026
condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 3. Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings and therefore, larger interest of justice would be met, in case, the matter may be restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC. The Revenue vehemently support the learned lower authorities action making addition(s) herein on merits. 4. Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC 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
ITA No.3725/Del/2026
This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced in the open court on 1st June, 2026 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29th June, 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
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026