YOGESHWAR,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WAD 2(2)(1), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8466/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2026AY 2012-134 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the NFAC, in dismissing the appeal on grounds of delay and misrepresentation, should have provided the assessee an opportunity to justify the service date or file a condonation application.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the NFAC was dismissed due to a 405-day delay. The assessee claimed the assessment order was served much later than its date, but this was not substantiated with evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC erred in dismissing the appeal on delay without affording the assessee an opportunity to explain or condone the delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA&

Hearing: 02.04.2026Pronounced: 02.05.2026

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated

23.10.2025 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

(hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’)

P a g e | 2 ITA No.8466/Del/2025 Yogeshwar (AY: 2012-13) in DIN & Order No.: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081946743(1) arising out

of the order dated 05.11.2019 u/s 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961

(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the ITO, Ward- 2(2)(1)

Ghaziabad for AY: 2012-13.

2.

On hearing both sides we find that appeal of the assessee was dismissed

by NFAC on the basis of delay of 405 days. We find that NFAC observes

that there was delay of 405 days, however, assessee has stated in Form 35

that there was no delay for the reason that the assessee claims assessment

order was served on 22.12.2020 while the assessment order is dated

5.11.2019. Assessee’s assertion of service on 22.12.2020 was not found to be

supported by any evidence and thus considering assessee’s response in Form

35 to be a deliberate misrepresentation, the appeal was dismissed on ground

of delay of 405 days in filing the same.

3.

We are of the considered view that NFAC being a quasi-judicial

authority, if intended to dismiss the appeal in limine, as barred by limitation

and discrediting the averments of the assessee in Form 35, then assessee

should have been given an opportunity to either justify the assertion of

service of the assessment order on 22.12.2020 or to have been given

P a g e | 3 ITA No.8466/Del/2025 Yogeshwar (AY: 2012-13) opportunity to file application for condonation of delay specially when the

appeal is acknowledged for being admitted for hearing on merits while

issuing notice to the assessee.

4.

In the light of aforesaid circumstances we allow the appeal of the

assessee for statistical purposes and restore the issue on merits as well as

question of law to the files of ld. CIT(A) to give assessee an opportunity of

hearing on the question of delay or allow the assessee an opportunity to file

application for condonation of delay. In the aforesaid terms the appeal is

allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 02.04.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Amitabh Shukla) (Anubhav Sharma) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 12.05.2026 Rohit, Sr. PS

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →