JAI KISSAN FOODS,KASHIPUR vs. WARD-2(2)(1) KASHI PUR, KASHIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 176/DDN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun05 June 2026AY 2022-233 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delays in filing the appeals before the CIT(A), emphasizing that technicalities should not impede substantial justice. The appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the CIT(A) with significant delays of 373 and 152 days. The CIT(A) refused to condone these delays, citing lack of justifiable reasons.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in refusing to condone the substantial delays in filing the appeals without considering the principles of substantial justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH “SMC & DB”, DEHRADUN

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA

Hearing: 29.05.2026Pronounced: 05.06.2026

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM: These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos.173 & 176/DDN/2026 for assessment year 2021-22 and 2024-25 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)-13, Mumbai’s orders, both 24.02.2026, having DINs and orders no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1086479286(1) and ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1086474636(1), involving proceedings

ITA Nos.173 & 176/DDN/2026

under section 143(1) and 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), respectively. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned CIT(A) has refused to condone the delays of 373 days and 152 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeals for AYs 2021-22 and 2024- 25. Both the assessee’s lower appeals were instituted on 08.08.2025 against the Assessing Officer’s assessments framed 01.07.2024 and 07.02.2025, thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons. 3. Faced with the situation, learned departmental representative could hardly dispute that the assessee had indeed filed his condonation petitions before the CIT(A) explaining all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond his control. 4. That being the case, we hereby quote Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), settling the issue long back that all such technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice. Accordingly, the delays caused in filing of both the appeals before the CIT(A) are

2 | P a g e

ITA Nos.173 & 176/DDN/2026

condoned and the assessee’s instant twin appeals are restored back to the CIT(A) for its afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. 5. These assessee’s twin appeals ITA Nos.173 & 176/DDN/2026 are allowed for statistical purposes. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open court on 5th June, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 5th June, 2026. RK/- 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 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →