What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the NFAC's dismissal of the appeal in limine without providing an opportunity to file a condonation application was against natural justice principles. The matter was restored to the NFAC for fresh consideration.

The assessee's appeal before the NFAC was dismissed due to a 17-day delay. The assessee claimed there was no delay, stating the date of service was later than the assessment order date, and filed the appeal within the presumed period.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC was justified in dismissing the appeal without allowing the assessee an opportunity to explain or condone the delay.

Kapoor Singh, Gohana vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, DELHI

Before: SHRI M BALAGANESH & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

Hearing: 04.05.2026Pronounced: 04.05.2026

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated

20.09.2025 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter

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

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 9176/Del/2025 Kapoor Singh (AY: 2017-18) &Order No : ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081357168(1) arising out of the

assessment order dated 30.12.2019 u/s 144 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax

Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the ITO, Ward-2,

Sonepat, for AY: 2017-18.

On hearing both sides we find that assessment order was passed u/s 144

r.w.s 143(3) which was challenged before ld. CIT(A) and there the appeal of

assessee was dismissed on the ground that delay in filing of appeal by 17

days.

We find that assessee had not filed any application for condonation of

delay on the assertion that there was actually no delay and in Form 35

assessee had mentioned that the date of service was 03.02.2020 against the

date order being 30.12.2019 and the appeal was filed on 15.02.2020 and

therefore, in Form 35 assessee had mentioned that there is no delay in filing

of the appeal.

However, NFAC was of the view that there is a delay of 17 days and by

quoting various judicial decisions preferred to dismiss the appeal in limine.

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 9176/Del/2025 Kapoor Singh (AY: 2017-18) 5. We are of the considered view that such an approach of NFAC is bereft

of all judicial principals which warrant that quasi-judicial authority should

follow principles of natural justice. If assessee had claimed there was no

delay and NFAC was of the view that there is a delay of 17 days then instead

of dismissing the appeal in limine, NFAC should have cautioned the

appellant and given reasonable opportunity for filing application for

condonation of delay and thereupon to have decided the issue against the

appellant. Since, such procedure has not been followed we are of the

considered view that impugned order cannot be sustained under law.

Accordingly, we allow the appeal of the assessee for statistical

purposes and restore the issue on merits as well as law to the files of ld.

CIT(A) to give assessee an opportunity to file application for condonation of

delay and thereupon to pass an order afresh on merits of the grounds.

Order pronounced in the open court on 04.05.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (M Balaganesh) (Anubhav Sharma) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 13.05.2026 Rohit, Sr. PS

P a g e | 4 ITA No. 9176/Del/2025 Kapoor Singh (AY: 2017-18) Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI

KAPOOR SINGH,GOHANA vs. ITO WARD-2 SONEPAT, SONEPAT

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