SANDEEP KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 47(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3885/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 June 2026AY 2012-133 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 condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding the assessee's explanation for the delay to be without malafide intent. The impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a significant delay of 2137 days, citing reasons such as non-receipt of order, illiteracy, email issues, and financial hardship. The Assessing Officer had passed an ex parte order due to non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned due to the reasons provided by the assessee, and if the ex parte assessment order was passed in violation of natural justice.

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, DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Amit Rustogi, CA
For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 25.06.2026Pronounced: 25.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIMAL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3885/Del/2026, A.Y. 2012-13 Sandeep Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer, 22257, 2nd Floor, Ward 47(1), Naya Bazar, Delhi New Delhi 110006 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: BPJPK9044R Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri Amit Rustogi, CA Respondent by : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 25.06.2026

O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The appeal filed by the assessee against order dated 02.01.2026 under section 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] arising out of assessment order dated 09.12.2019 for assessment year 2012-13.

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 3885/Del/2026 Sandeep Kumar 2. Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing application for condonation of delay of 2137 days in filing appeal due to non-receipt of order, illiteracy/ lack of awareness of faceless proceedings / impugned order, email communication issues, mis-communication with previous consultant and financial hardship.

3.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that Ld. Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act on 30.07.2019, 19.08.2019, 04.11.2019, there was no compliance. Ld. AO passed ex parte order dated 09.12.2019 in violation of principle of natural justice.

4.

Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that appellant/assessee had failed to respond various notices.

5.

From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. AO had passed ex parte order dated 09.12.2019 u/s 144/147 of the Act in violation of principle of natural justice dismissed application for condonation of delay of 2137 days in filing appeal. The assessee had pleaded that due to non-receipt of order, illiteracy/ lack of awareness of faceless proceeding/ impugned order, email communication issues, mis-communication with previous consultant and financial hardships the delay occurred. The explanation for condonation of delay does not smack of malafide as appellant

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 3885/Del/2026 Sandeep Kumar has not gained anything, therefore, delay of 2137 days in filing appeal is condoned.

6.

In view of above material facts, in interest of justice, impugned orders dated 02.01.2026 is set aside, the application for condonation of delay 2137 days is allowed and the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the appellant/assessee.

7.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 25.06.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (VIMAL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 07.07.2026 Binita, Sr. PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 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 →