What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for readjudication after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal on merit.

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 124 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay, failing to decide the issue on merit.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without condoning the delay and without deciding the issue on merit.

Shiv Shakti Steel Private Limited vs Circle 1(1) | ITAT Kolkata 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “डी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA �ी राजेशकुमार, लेखा सट�य एवं �ी �द�प कुमार चौबे, �या�यक सद�यके सम� [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 2927/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shiv Shakti Steel Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata

(PAN: AAGCS 9768 L) ( अपीलाथ� ) Respondent / ��यथ� Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 11.05.2026 क� �त�थ Date of Pronouncement/ 20.05.2026 आदेश उ�घोषणा क� �त�थ For the Appellant/ Shri Akshay Ringasia, CA �नधा�रती क� ओर से For the Respondent/ None राज�व क� ओर से

ORDER / आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 21.05.2025 for the AY 2010-11. 2. At the time of hearing the Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that there is a delay of 124 days in filing the appeal for which the condonation petition was filed. The Ld. A.R explained the delay which we find to be bonafide and genuine. Accordingly, we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.

2 I.T.A. No.2927/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shiv Shakti Steel Pvt. Ltd. 3. None appeared on behalf of the revenue.

After hearing the Ld. A.R and after perusing the appellate order, we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order without condoning the delay of three days thereby dismissing the appeal in limine in violation of Section 250(6) of the Act. In our opinion, the Ld. CIT(A) has to state point for determination and decision thereon along with reasons for taking the decision. However, the appellate order has been passed without deciding the issue on merit as stated hereinabove. In our opinion, the ends of justice would be well served if the delay of three days is condoned and appeal is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for readjudicaiton after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, we restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A). In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 5. Order is pronounced in the open court on 20th May, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Pradip Kumar Choubey /�द�प कुमार चौबे) (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश कुमार) Judicial Member/�या�यक सद�य Accountant Member/लेखा सद�य Dated: 20th May, 2026 SM, Sr. PS

3 I.T.A. No.2927/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Shiv Shakti Steel Pvt. Ltd.

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Shiv Shakti Steel Pvt. Ltd., 4, B.B.D Bag, East Stephen House, Dalhousie, Kolkata-700001 2. Respondent – DCIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail)

SHIV SHAKTI STEEL PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. CIRCLE 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments