SARFARAZ AHMED,MEERUIT vs. WARD 1(2)(5), MEERUT

ITA 503/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 September 2026AY 2015-165 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal considered the findings of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in dismissing the appeal in limine on the ground of delay and also reviewed the reasons provided by the assessee's counsel for the delay. The Tribunal was of the considered view that the delay in filing the appeal could be condoned. Consequently, the matter was restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for adjudication of the case afresh, with an adequate opportunity to be provided to the assessee. The assessee was also directed to file all relevant details and documents before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in a timely manner. The Tribunal explicitly stated that the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, implying that the substantive issues were not adjudicated on merits by the ITAT itself, but rather the procedural hurdle was overcome to allow for a fresh hearing before the lower appellate authority. No issue was expressly left undecided, as the primary decision was to remand.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sarfaraz Ahmed, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against an order dated 09.01.2026 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi, for the assessment year 2015-16. The assessee's grounds of appeal challenged the dismissal of his appeal by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in limine on the grounds of delay. The assessee contended that the delay was caused by his lack of education, unfamiliarity with income tax laws, and insufficient legal assistance. The assessment order was allegedly served on 16.07.2024, and the appeal was filed on 14.08.2024. The assessee also argued that the Ld. CIT(A) overlooked supporting documents and relevant judicial precedents regarding condonation of delay. The original assessment was made on 07.03.2023, with a tax liability of Rs. 23,68,224, which was later rectified to Rs. 35,58,542. The addition in total income was Rs. 63,19,006.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC can be condoned, considering the assessee's claim of sufficient and reasonable cause, including being an uneducated agriculturist lacking proper legal assistance and unawareness of the assessment order, and whether the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC erred in dismissing the appeal in limine on this ground, contrary to settled principles of substantial justice over procedural technicalities and liberal approach in condoning delay as per binding judicial precedents. (Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, implicitly relevant for appeal procedures). Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC failed to appreciate the sufficient and reasonable cause for the delay, citing his status as an uneducated agriculturist, lack of legal knowledge, and delayed service of the assessment order. He contended that the dismissal was arbitrary and contrary to the principle of substantial justice, and that binding precedents on liberal condonation of delay were ignored. The assessee also claimed that the Ld. CIT(A) overlooked supporting documents and that the delay of 496 days was wrongly considered. Revenue's contentions: The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SH. KRINWANT SAHAY

Hearing: 21/09/2026Pronounced: 28/09/2026

PER KRINWANT SAHAY AM Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 09.01.2026 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC Delhi for the 2015-16. Grounds of appeal are as under :-

1.

The assessee denies the determined tax liability of Rs.35,58,542/- along with the addition of Rs.63,19,006 made in the total income of the assessee. Income was assessed on 07.03.2023 and tax liability was Rs.23,68,224. Later, the A.O rectified the demand to Rs. 35,58,542/- vide order passed w/y 154 r.w.s. 147 on 01.05.2024. Rs. 3558542

2.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in dismissing the appeal in limine on 2 the ground of delay, without appreciating that the appel

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →