ARUN ADLAKHA,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(1), GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 9177/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 January 2026AY 2012-13Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial 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, citing the case of Collector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others, held that technical aspects should not impede substantial justice. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for AY 2012-13 against an order passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A)/NFAC refused to condone a delay of 1090 days in filing the assessee's lower appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the lower appeal should be condoned to allow for substantial justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Ms. Vanshika Taneja, Adv
Hearing: 29.01.2026Pronounced: 29.01.2026

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1083295970(1) dated 04.12.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the sides that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay of 1090 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 13.01.2023 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 20.12.2019 thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons.

1.

Arun Adlakha 4. Faced with this situation, learned departmental representative could hardly dispute that the assessee had indeed explained the above delay before the CIT(A)/NFAC explaining all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond his control.

5.

That being the case, I hereby quote Collector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), settling the issue long back that all such technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice and restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the assessee shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →