AKANSH AGGARWAL,DELHI vs. ITO WARD 59(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6427/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 February 2026AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON'BLE (Vice President), SMT. RENU JAUHRI, HON'BLE (Accountant Member)1 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 noted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals ex-parte. The assessee requested a remand for fresh adjudication on merits. The Tribunal found that the delay in filing the appeal deserved to be condoned and restored both appeals to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) without condoning a 164-day delay in filing the appeal against the assessment order and also for the penalty order. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) wrongly observed that no appeal was filed against the assessment order.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and if the appeals should be remanded for fresh adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 270A,Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, CA, Shri Suraj Gupta, Advocate
Hearing: 28.01.2026Pronounced: 28.01.2026

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 6427/DEL/2025
ITA No. 6428/ DEL/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

DEL/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Akansh Aggarwal Vs ITO, WARD 59(1) C/o M/s Raj Kumar & Associates Vikas Bhawan Chartered Accountants, Delhi L-7A (LGF), South Extension [JAO] Part-II New Delhi-49 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. BQFPA1756F Assessee Represented by : Shri Raj Kumar, CA Shri Suraj Gupta, Advocate, Revenue/Department Represented by : Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 28.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 28.01.2026 ORDER PER RENU JAUHRI : The above captioned appeals are preferred by the assessee against the orders dated 17.09.2025 and 19.09.2025, passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, New Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as, “Act”] for A.Y. 2020-21.

2.

At the outset, Ld. AR submitted that both the orders of Ld. CIT(A) are ex- parte. In the appeal against the assessment order dated 01.09.2022, Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay of 164 days in filing of appeal and dismissed the same in limine. As regards the appeal against the penalty order u/s 270A, Ld. CIT(A)

6427_6428_DEL_2025_Akansh Aggarwal vs ITO has wrongly observed that no appeal was filed against the assessment order implying that the assessee had accepted the addition. As no compliance was made by the assessee, during appellate proceedings, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal against penalty also ex-parte. 2.1 In view of above, Ld. AR has requested that both the appeals may be remanded to Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. Ld. DR has not objected to the said proposition.

3.

After hearing both the parties and considering the material placed before us, we are of the view that the delay of 164 days in filing of appeal before Ld. CIT(A) against the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B dated 01.09.2022, deserves to be condoned in the light of explanation submitted by the assessee.

4.

Accordingly, we restore back both the appeals to Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be vigilant and make requisite compliance before Ld. CIT(A).

5.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 28 -01-2026.

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →