INTEGRATED CASETECH CONSULTANTS PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8077/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 April 2026AY 2020-213 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's earlier appeal and condonation application in violation of natural justice. Therefore, the impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, the 138-day delay was condoned, and the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed revised income tax returns and was selected for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer made additions to the income. The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay, which was dismissed along with the appeal. The assessee then filed a further appeal before the ITAT with a 2-day delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal and condonation application without adhering to principles of natural justice, and if the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 143(2),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’: NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri Sumaksh Mahajan, Adv
For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr, DR 01.04.2026
Pronounced: 08.04.2026

O R D E R PER VIMAL KUMAR, JM: Application for condonation of delay of 2 days in filing appeal and appeal filed by the Assessee are against order dated 30.09.2025 of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] arising out of assessment order dated 13.09.2022 of Ld. Assessing Officer/ Assessment Unit [hereinafter referred as ‘the AO’] u/s 143(3) r.w.r 144B of the Act for Assessment Year 2020-21.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that assesse filed return of income on 15.02.2021 declaring income of Rs.1,68,47,090/-. Later ITR was revised twice on 31.03.2021 and 30.05.2021 by admitting income of Rs.1,68,50,250/- and Rs.83,38,930/- respectively. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS. Notice u/s 143(2) dated 29.06.2021 was issued. Notice u/s 142(1) of the Act along with questionnaire were issued. No compliance was made. On completion of proceedings, Ld. AO vide order dated 13.09.2022 made additions of Rs.15,000/-, Rs.17,81,280/, Rs.52,20,000/ and Rs.71,719/-. Against order dated 13.09.2022 of Ld. AO, the assessee filed application for condonation of delay of 138 days in filing appeal and appeal before Ld. CIT(A) which were dismissed vide order dated 30.09.2025.

3.

Being aggrieved appellant/assessee preferred application for condonation of delay of 2 days in filing appeal and present appeal.

4.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant/assessee submitted that delay of 2 days in filing is due to lack of knowledge, non-communication of order and engagement of tax consultant. The explanation does not smack of malafides as appellant has not gained anything by not filing appeal within period of limitation. Therefore, delay of 2 days in filing appeal is condoned.

5.

Ld. Authorized Representative for appellant assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) through ex-parte order dismissed the application for condonation of delay of 138 days in filing appeal and appeal in violation of principle of natural justice. So, the matter may be restored to file of Ld. CIT(A).

6.

Ld. Departmental Representative had no objection.

7.

From examination of record, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 30.09.2025 dismissed application for condonation of delay of 138 days in filing appeal and appeal in violation of principle of natural justice. Appellant has requested the matter may be restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A). Ld. Departmental Representative has no objection. In view of the above material facts, in interest of natural justice, impugned order dated 30.09.2025 of Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and delay of 138 days in filing appeal is condoned. The matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh decision in accordance with law after affording fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

8.

In the result, the application for condonation of delay of 2 days in filing appeal is allowed and appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →