RUPESH MITTAL,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 47(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8285/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 June 2026AY 2017-183 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. It held that the ex parte orders passed by the AO violated the principles of natural justice and set aside these orders.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 133 days. The appeal was against orders passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 154 and Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act. The assessee cited illiteracy, communication issues, and consultant miscommunication as reasons for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte orders passed by the AO were in violation of natural justice and if the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 147,Section 144B

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 Rastogi, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Yashvendra Singh, CIT-DR
Hearing: 24.06.2026Pronounced: 24.06.2026

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. 8285/Del/2025, A.Y. 2017-18 Rupesh Mittal Vs. Income Tax officer, C-187, Gali Number-7 Ward-47(1), Police Station, Bhajanpura, New Delhi Garhi Mendu, North East Delhi �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: ALWPK6242K Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri Amit Rastogi, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Yashvendra Singh, CIT-DR Date of Hearing 24.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 24.06.2026 O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: The Application for condonation of delay of 133 days in filing appeal and appeal filed by assessee is against order dated 28.10.2025 of the Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) in pursuance to assessment order dated 18.05.2023 of Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act for A.Y. 2017-18.

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 8285/Del/2025 Rupesh Mittal

2.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that there is delay of 133 days in filing appeal due to illiteracy/ lack of awareness of impugned order, email communication issues, mis-communication with previous consultant and financial year hardship. The explanation for condonation of delay does not smack of malafide, therefore, delay of 133 days in filing appeal is condoned.

3.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that Ld. Assessing Officer passed ex parte order dated 18.05.2023 and 28.10.2025 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 18.05.2023 u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act and order dated 28.10.2025 u/s 154 of the Act in violation of principle of natural justice.

6.

In view of above material facts, in interest of justice, impugned orders dated 18.05.2023 and 28.10.2025 are set aside and the matter is restored to the file of

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 8285/Del/2025 Rupesh Mittal

Ld. AO for afresh adjudication in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the appellant/assessee.

7.

The application for condonation of delay 133 days is allowed and appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24.06.2026

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 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →