SANDEEP KUMAR SINGH,RANCHI vs. ITO WARD 3(1), RANCHI, RANCHI

ITA 242/RAN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 September 2026AY 2023-244 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sandeep Kumar Singh, filed an appeal before the ITAT challenging the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (CIT(A)) for Assessment Year 2023-24. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal solely on technical grounds of delay in filing the appeal, without considering the merits of the case. The delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was 173 days. The assessee contended that the assessment order was passed without proper opportunity of being heard and that procedural norms were not followed. The assessee also raised issues regarding his residential status, salary income, and TDS credit. The revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that when substantial justice is pitted against technicality like limitation, it is always better to adjudicate on substantial justice. By not condoning the delay, considerable loss could be caused to the assessee, whereas condoning the delay and adjudicating on merits would allow the assessee to understand their mistakes. Therefore, the Tribunal condoned the delay of 173 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) in the interest of justice. The issues in the appeal were restored to the file of the CIT(A) for readjudication on merits, with a direction to provide the assessee with an adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee was directed to cooperate and provide all relevant documents and evidence. The Tribunal did not decide on the merits of the other grounds raised by the assessee, as the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on technical grounds of delay without considering the merits of the case and without providing an adequate opportunity of being heard, thereby violating principles of natural justice, as per the E-Appeal Scheme, 2023 and Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961? - Assessee's contention: The CIT(A) failed to appreciate the merits, denied a proper hearing, and did not provide an oral hearing via video conference as per rules. Documents were not properly examined by the AO, and the assessee's employer and duration of stay were not considered. - Revenue's contention: The revenue supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). 2. Whether the assessee's residential status was incorrectly determined as 'Resident but not ordinarily resident' instead of 'Non-Resident Indian (NRI)', and if so, whether the salary income should be assessed accordingly? - Assessee's contention: The assessee was an NRI, and his salary income earned from foreign ship employers should not be taxed in India due to his residential status. TDS was deducted by an Indian agent, but the primary employment was foreign. - Revenue's contention: The revenue supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). 3. Whether the salary income and the credit for Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) under Section 192 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, were correctly computed and granted? - Assessee's contention: The actual salary was Rs 71,51,689.00, with TDS of Rs 22,39,960.00 deducted. The ITR was filed excluding the TDS value. Full credit for TDS should have been granted as the entire salary was being taxed. - Revenue's contention: The revenue supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 192,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY & SMT. RAJANI GUDURI

For Appellant: Shri Vinay Goenka, C.A
For Respondent: Shri Sandipan Khan, Sr.DR
Hearing: 10/09/2026Pronounced: 25/09/2026

PER: BENCH

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi (in short, the ld. CIT(A) dated 27/03/2026 for the A.Y. 2023-24 wherein the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

"

1.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. CIT(A) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in passing the Order, in the way it was passed, and the Order dismissing the appeal solely on Technical Grounds of delay in filing the appeal, without appreciating the merits of the case and without granting proper opportunity of being heard and without providing opportunity of Oral Hearing through video Conf

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 192

All 841 judgments and leading authorities on Section 192 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →