SHISHU SHIKSHA SAMITI PASCHIM UTTAR PRADESH,UTTAR PRADESH vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD B, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 805/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2026AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It held that the NFAC should have considered the merits of the assessee's submissions regarding the opportunity of hearing, rather than solely relying on the issuance of notices.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 58 days. The primary contention was that the Assessing Officer did not provide an adequate opportunity for hearing, rendering the assessment invalid. The NFAC had dismissed this claim, stating that notices were issued and responses received.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment order passed under Section 147/144 was sustainable due to an alleged lack of opportunity for hearing. Whether the NFAC erred in not considering the merits of the assessee's submissions on this issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, DELHI

Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 13.05.2026Pronounced: 20.05.2026

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated

12.09.2025 of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter

referred to as the First Appellate Authority or ‘the ld. FAA’ for short) in DIN

P a g e | 2 ITA No.805/Del/2026 Shishu Shiksha Samiti Paschim (AY: 2016-17) & Order No : ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1080658939(1) arising out of the

assessment order dated 14.03.2022 u/s 147/144/144B of the Income Tax Act,

1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by NFAC, Delhi, for AY:

2016-17.

2.

On hearing both sides we find that appeal has been filed by delay of 58

days for which assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay.

Given the reason cited and the delay is not of substantial period the delay is

condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

3.

Further we find that the impugned order of ld. CIT(A) has been passed

on the basis of assessee had merely raised ground that assessing officer has

not given appropriate opportunity of hearing therefore, the assessment

concluded u/s 147/144 of the Act is not sustainable. However, NFAC had

concluded that assessee was issued noticed on 10.12.2021, 07.01.2022,

12.01.2022 and assessee had also filed response to notice u/s 148 dated

30.03.2021 therefore, the assessee’s claim of not being given opportunity is

not sustainable.

4.

Ld. DR has defended same vehemently, however, we are of the

considered view that the ld. CIT(A) should have at least considered the merits

P a g e | 3 ITA No.805/Del/2026 Shishu Shiksha Samiti Paschim (AY: 2016-17) of the assertion as relevant submissions in that regard were there before

NFAC. Thus, we restore the issue on merits as well as law to the files of

NFAC to give fresh opportunity of the assessee and pass order afresh.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20.05.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (Anubhav Sharma) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated 20.05.2026 Rohit, Sr. PS

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →