UTC KARAMCHARI VETAN BHOGI RINN AND BACHAT SAHKARI SAMITI LTD,DEHRADUN vs. ITO,WARD 1(1)(3) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC, emphasizing that technicalities should not impede substantial justice. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was filed with a delay of 7 days. The CIT(A)/NFAC refused to condone this delay, stating that the reasons provided were not justifiable.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC should be condoned despite the reasons not being considered justifiable by the lower appellate authority.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH “DB”, DEHRADUN
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018-19, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1084466288(1), dated
ITA No.128/DDN/2026
06.01.2026 involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay of 7 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 22.05.2021 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 16.04.2021, 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 petition before the CIT(A)/NFAC 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 delay caused in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC is condoned and the assessee’s instant appeal is restored back to the
2 | P a g e
ITA No.128/DDN/2026
CIT(A)/NFAC 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. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 25th May, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 26th May, 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
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026