OM PRAKASH,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, GURGAON

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2012/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 September 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal first addressed the issue of limitation. The assessee had filed an application for condonation of delay, and the Tribunal found the contents of the application to be genuine. Therefore, the delay of approximately 240 days was condoned. Regarding the second issue, the Tribunal noted that effect had been given to the appellate order of the Ld. CIT(A) by the DCIT, Circle 3(1) Gurugram, vide an order dated 25.02.2026. As a result, the appeal filed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had become infructuous. The Tribunal concluded that the appeal was liable to be withdrawn and accordingly dismissed it as withdrawn. No specific finding was made on the merits of the original assessment or the CIT(A)'s order, as the appeal was disposed of on a procedural ground.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Om Prakash, filed an appeal against the order dated 31/03/2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT (A)-1, Bengaluru. This order arose from an Assessment Order dated 26/09/2019 passed by the Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2017-18. The appeal before the Tribunal was filed with a delay of approximately 240 days, for which the assessee filed an application for condonation of delay. The Tribunal condoned the delay. Subsequently, it was noted that effect to the appellate order of the CIT(A) had been given by the DCIT, Circle 3(1) Gurugram, vide an order dated 25.02.2026. Consequently, the appeal before the Tribunal had become infructuous.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation, and if so, whether the delay should be condoned? (Question of procedure turning on the facts of the case). Assessee's Contention: The assessee filed an application for condonation of delay, stating that the contents thereof were genuine. The assessee relied on the genuineness of the reasons provided for the delay. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific contention from the revenue regarding the limitation or condonation of delay. However, the revenue was represented by a Senior DR. 2. Whether the appeal has become infructuous due to the subsequent action taken by the revenue authorities? Assessee's Contention: The assessee's representative (CA and Adv) were present. The judgment does not explicitly record their arguments on this point, but their presence implies they were heard. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not explicitly record the revenue's arguments on this point, but the Senior DR was present.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: MS MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Kumar Singla, CA and Ms. Arik Singla, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Mahendra Singh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 01/07/2026Pronounced: 01/07/2026

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No. 2012/Del/2026 (A.Y 2017-18) Om Prakash Vs. Deputy Commissioner of House No. 785, Sector- Income Tax, 10A, Gurgaon, H.O. Circle-(3) HSIIDC Gurgaon, Haryana Building, Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon, Haryana (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AGEPP4609G

Assessee by : Shri Vijay Kumar Singla, CA and Ms. Arik Singla, Adv Revenue by: Shri Mahendra Singh, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 01/07/2026 Date of pronouncement 01/07/2026 O R D E R PER MADHUMITA ROY, J. M.: The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the

order dated 31/03/2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-

tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT (A)-1, Bengaluru, under Section 250 of the

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) arising out

of the Assessment Order dated 26/09/2019 passed by the

Assessment Unit, Income-tax Department under Section 154 of the

Act for Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

The appeal is barred by limitation for about 240 days in

support of which application of condonation of delay has been filed

2 ITA No. 2012/Del/2026 Om Prakash Vs. DCIT by the Assessee, the contents whereof seems to be genuine and,

therefore, the delay is condoned.

3.

The instant appeal is arising out of the order dated 31.03.2025

passed by the Ld. CIT(A) Bengaluru, arising from the order dated

26.09.2029 passed under Section 154 of the Act by the CPC

Bengaluru for A.Y 2017-18. However, effect to the appellate order

has been given vide order dated 25.02.2026 issued by the DCIT,

Circle 3(1) Gurugram. Accordingly, the appeal has become

infructuous, and he same is liable to be withdrawn. Thus, the

appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Order pronounced in the open court on 01/07/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (KRINWANT SAHAY) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 21/09/2026 R. Naheed, Sr PS Copy forwarded to

1.

Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi

3 ITA No. 2012/Del/2026 Om Prakash Vs. DCIT

More judgments on Section 154

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →