JASPAL SINGH,HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD(1), HARYANA

PER LALIET KUMAR, JM

This is an appeal filed by the assessee feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

NFAC [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 31.10.2025 passed for assessment year 2015-16. ITA-1716/CHD/2025 A.Y. 2015-16 2

read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide order dated

Against the said assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal

before the Ld. CIT(A). However, as noted by the Ld. CIT(A), the appeal was filed belatedly by 31 days and no separate application

for condonation of delay was filed by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A)

further observed that in Form No.35 the assessee had mentioned

“No” against the relevant column regarding delay in filing of appeal.

Representative submitted that the assessee is a small taxpayer

belonging to rural background and due to lack of proper legal

advice and technical understanding, the appeal before the Ld.

CIT(A) could not be filed within prescribed limitation period. It was submitted that the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate.

The Ld. AR further submitted that substantial additions have been made in the assessment order and if the matter is dismissed on technical grounds, the assessee would suffer irreparable loss

without adjudication on merits. It was therefore prayed that one

more opportunity may kindly be granted to the assessee to file

proper application for condonation of delay before the Ld. CIT(A).

The Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee is ready to comply

with any condition imposed by the Tribunal.

strongly relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A). It was submitted

that despite sufficient statutory opportunity, the assessee failed to file any condonation application before the first appellate authority

and even made incorrect declaration in Form No.

therefore submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in dismissing

the appeal as barred by limitation.

perused the material available on record including the impugned

order of the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) in limine without adjudicating the issues involved on merits merely for want of proper condonation

application explaining delay in filing of appeal. We further find that though the conduct of the assessee in not filing proper condonation

application cannot be appreciated, however, at the same time, the settled proposition of law is that substantial justice should prevail

over technical considerations. The powers vested with the appellate

authorities are required to be exercised in a justice-oriented

manner so that matters are decided on merits rather than being

rejected on technicalities.

willingness to file proper application for condonation of delay and ITA-1716/CHD/2025 A.Y. 2015-16 5

pursue the appeal diligently, we deem it appropriate, in the interest

of substantial justice, to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee is directed to file a proper application for condonation of delay alongwith supporting

affidavit and necessary explanation within such period as may be granted by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) shall consider the same

sympathetically in accordance with law and thereafter adjudicate

the appeal on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

No.35, we deem it appropriate to impose cost of Rs.3,000/- upon the assessee. The said amount shall be deposited by the assessee

in PGI Poor Patient Welfare Fund before the next date of hearing

before the Ld. CIT(A). Proof of such deposit shall be furnished

before the Ld. CIT(A). The restoration of the appeal is subject to payment of aforesaid cost.

ITA-1716/CHD/2025 A.Y. 2015-16 6

आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ"/ The Appellant