Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order of the CIT(A) for AY 2016-17. There was a delay of 92 days in filing the first appeal before the CIT(A), which was not intentional. The assessee seeks an opportunity to contest the case on merit, and the Revenue did not seriously oppose this plea.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) as it was not intentional and the assessee is interested in pursuing the case on merit. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not discussed the merits of the grounds of appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned and the matter restored for decision on merit.
Sections Cited
254(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER;
This appeal by assessee is directed against the ex-parte order of ld.
CIT(A)-7, Delhi dated 14.11.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17.
Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. Ms Saloni Sankhe learned Advocate/ Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that there was little delay in filing appeal before ld CIT(A). The Assessing Officer (AO) passed assessment order on 26.12.2018. First appeal before ld CIT(A) was filed only on 26.04.2029, thus, in filing such appeal there was delay of 92 days. The delay in filing such appeal was not intentional. The consultant of assessee neither filed nor advised to file further appeal in time and when asked him to take further necessary legal step, he refused to take further
ITA 8977/Mum/2025 (AY 2016-17) Amarchand Lakhmichand Narang step to file appeal. The assessee engaged other consultant and file appeal before ld CIT(A). There was reasonable cause to condone such delay. The assessee is interested to persue his case on merit. The appeal of assessee was dismissed in limine, without considering the merits of the case. The assessee seeks one more opportunity to contest the case before ld. CIT(A). The assessee has good case on merit and is likely to succeed in one more opportunity to contest the case before ld. CIT(A) with the liberty to file written submission along with corroborative / supporting evidence. She undertakes on behalf of assessee to be more vigilant in making timely compliance before lower authorities.
On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr.
DR) for the Revenue not seriously opposed the plea of ld. AR of the assessee.
We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the lower authorities carefully. We find that ld CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee by not condoning the delay in filing first appeal. Before us, the ld AR of the assessee vehemently urged that the assessee is really interested to pursue his case on merit.
Considering the circumstances explained by ld AR of the assessee, which we have noted above, we find that the delay in filing appeal is not intentional, rather the assessee is interested to pursue his case on merit, hence delay in filing appeal before ld CIT(A) is condoned. Further we find that the ld CIT(A) has not discussed the merits of various grounds of appeal, therefore, keeping in view the principle of natural
ITA 8977/Mum/2025 (AY 2016-17) Amarchand Lakhmichand Narang justice, the matter is restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide all the issues on merit. The assessee is also directed to furnish all the details and submissions to substantiate his grounds of appeal. In the result, grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced on 12/02/2026 at the time of hearing in the open court.