SUDHIR KUMAR SAINI,MEERUT vs. ITO WARD 2(5), MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3870/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 July 2026AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It restored the assessee's appeal back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication, acknowledging the possibility of communication gaps.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2011-12 was filed with a significant delay. The assessee contended that communication gaps prevented them from presenting all facts in lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's appeal should be restored to the CIT(A) due to alleged communication gaps preventing proper representation of facts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 02.06.2026Pronounced: 02.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3870/Del/2026 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vs. Income Tax Officer Sudhir Kuamr Saini 335, Golabarh, Ward-2(5), Aurangshahapur, Aaykar Bhawan, Meerut- 250 002 Bhainsali Ground, Uttar Pradesh Meerut- 250 001 Uttar Pradesh PAN: EHAPS3798Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. V. Raj Kumar, Adv. Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 02.06.2026 Date of pronouncement 02.06.2026 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals); Addl./JCIT(A) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Jodhpur’s order dated 12.08.2025 passed in DIN & Order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1079525777(1), involving proceedings under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income- tax Act, 1961; hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

ITA No. 3870/Del/2026

2.

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 158 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3.

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s/Revenue’s condonation averments, delay of 158 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

4.

Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings and therefore, larger interest of justice would be met, in case, the matter may be restored back to the Assessing Officer. The Revenue vehemently support the learned lower authorities action making addition(s) herein on merits.

5.

Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out. It is therefore deemed appropriate in 2 | P a g e

ITA No. 3870/Del/2026

the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

6.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Order pronounced in the open court on 2nd June, 2026.

Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 01.07.2026 Pooja Mittal/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi

3 | P a g e

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →