VIDVATA INTERVIEW MAKERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), GURGAON, HARYANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 136/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 June 2026AY 2015-164 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 before the CIT(A) and restored the matter to the AO for fresh decision on the penalty. The AO was directed to consider the quantum appeal outcome, existing material, and any new evidence, and provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a significant delay of 1738 days. The assessee claimed lack of knowledge about the assessment and penalty orders due to being a non-resident and operating from a different location.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) in penalty proceedings should be condoned and the matter restored for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA 136/DEL/2026
ITA No.1237/Del/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCHES, NEW DELHI,BENCH: B BEFORE SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA 136/DEL/2026 िनधा�रण वष�/Assmt. Year: 2015-16) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF VIDVATA INTERVIEW INCOME TAX, CIRCLE MAKERS PRIVATE LIMITED 1(1), GURGAON 902, SHYAM KUNJ, PLOT NO. 5TH FLOOR, HSIIDC 26, J.B NAGAR, ANDHERI Vs. BUILDING, VANIJYA EAST, MUMBAI, MUMBAI- NIKUNJ, UDHYOG VIHAR, 400059, MAHARASHTRA PHASE- V, GURGAON- 122001, HARYANA (अपीलाथ� Appellant) (��थ� Respondent) Permanent Account Number of AACCV2915J Assessee: िनधा�रती �ारा/Assessee represented by: Shri Anup Kumar, Adv राज� व �ारा/Revenue represented by: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 26-May-2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 24-June, 2026. आदेश / ORDER PER MADHUMITA ROY, JM: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 11.11.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] under Section 250 of

ITA 136/DEL/2026 VIDVATA INTERVIEW MAKERS PRIVATE LIMITED

the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out of the Penalty Order dated 31.05.2018 passed by the ACIT, Circl-1(1), Gurgaon (hereinafter referred to as ‘the ld. AO’) under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for Assessment Year 2015-16.

2.

We have heard the parties and perused the record. We observe that there was a delay of 1738 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A) in the penalty proceedings. In the quantum appeal, the delay was condoned and the issue was restored to the file of the AO by the Tribunal by and under the order dated 27.08.2025 in ITA No.1237/Del/2025. While condoning the delay, the Tribunal observed as follows:-

“7. The AR submitted that the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee without going into the ground of the delay. The assessee has given a sufficient cause for not to filing the appeal within time. He further submitted that assessee has no knowledge about the assessment order and came to know about the passing assessment order as well as penalty order immediately, send a letter to the assessee officer on 22.01.2019. The Ld. NFAC should have condoned the delay and appeal be heard on merit. The ld. AR has also submitted that the assessee company director was non residence of India and company was registered a temporary address at New Delhi but the business operations was never carried on at the said address. The business operations were carried on at Didarganj, Patna. The assessee not issued any communication and the AO passed the exparte assessment without being heard the assessee.”

3.

The Appellant is not a resident of India and there was no deficiency on the part of the assessee which is appearing from the written submissions.

ITA 136/DEL/2026 VIDVATA INTERVIEW MAKERS PRIVATE LIMITED 4. The Ld. DR has no objection to the assessee being given another opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A).

5.

Under these facts and circumstances of the matter, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the AO for deciding on the penalty afresh upon considering the outcome of the quantum appeal; upon considering the material on record and any other evidence that the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing and upon affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24th June, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (RAMIT KOCHAR) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 24th June, 2026. dk Copy to:

ITA 136/DEL/2026 VIDVATA INTERVIEW MAKERS PRIVATE LIMITED

Copy to: VIDVATA INTERVIEW MAKERS PRIVATE LIMITED, 902, SHYAM KUNJ, PLOT NO. 26, J.B 1 NAGAR, ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400059, MAHARASHTRA ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), GURGAON, 5TH FLOOR, HSIIDC BUILDING, VANIJYA 2 NIKUNJ, UDHYOG VIHAR, PHASE- V, GURGAON, GURGAON-122001, HARYANA 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, DELHI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →