Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 arose against an order that refused to condone a 132-day delay in filing a lower appeal. The delay was attributed to circumstances beyond the assessee's control.
Held
The Tribunal cited the case of Collector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), emphasizing that technicalities should not obstruct substantial justice. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was sufficiently explained to warrant condonation.
Sections Cited
147
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081994367(1) dated 25.10.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
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 132 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 07.09.2022 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 29.03.2022 thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons.
Ashok Kumar Agarwal 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.
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.