K K SPUN INDIA LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 NEW DELHI, JHANDEWALAN DELHI

PDF · subscribers

ITA 2007/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 January 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)3 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(Appeals) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal for a delay of 30 days without providing an opportunity to explain the delay. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(Appeals) had also gone into the merits of the additions/disallowances after dismissing the appeal on a procedural ground. The Tribunal found that the inadvertent mention of 'no delay' in Form 35 should not prevent the ascertainment of the actual delay. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) is directed to decide the appeal after considering the assessee's explanation for any delay and after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee, in accordance with law. The issue of the merits of the additions/disallowances was not decided by the Tribunal.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Seema Goel, filed an appeal before the CIT(Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi for Assessment Year 2018-19. The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(Appeals) for a delay of 30 days in filing. The assessee contended that the delay was inadvertently mentioned as 'no delay' in Form 35. The CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay and without providing an opportunity to explain the delay. Furthermore, the CIT(Appeals) proceeded to examine the merits of the additions/disallowances despite dismissing the appeal on a procedural ground. The assessee requested that the appeal be restored to the file of the CIT(Appeals) or the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal for a delay of 30 days without providing an opportunity to explain the delay and without considering the inadvertent error in Form 35? (Question of law and fact) Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that the mention of 'no delay' in Form 35 was an inadvertent error. The CIT(Appeals) failed to provide an opportunity to explain the delay and dismissed the appeal on this ground. The CIT(Appeals) also incorrectly went into the merits of the additions/disallowances after dismissing the appeal procedurally. The assessee sought restoration of the appeal. Revenue's contentions: The judgment records no specific contentions from the Revenue.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Adv, Shri Sarthak Abrol, Advocate &, Shri Pawan Garg, CA

For Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR

Hearing: 26.08.2025

सुनवाईक�तारीख/ Date of hearing: 26.08.2025 29.08.2025 उ�ोषणाक�तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M.

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi dated 05.03.2025 for the AY 2018-19 in dismissing the appeal without condoning the delay of 30 days.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in Form 35 the assessee has inadvertently mentioned that there is no delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee observing that there is a delay 1 of 30 days in filing the appeal and that assessee has not filed any explanation for the delay. Ld. Counsel submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) did not give the assessee an opportunity to explain about the delay and dismissed the appeal of the assessee observing that there is delay of 30 days. Further the Ld. CIT(A) also gone into the merits of the additions/disallowances even though the appeal was dismissed for want of condonation petition. Ld. Counsel requested that the appeal may be restored to the file of either the Ld. CIT(A) or the Assessing Officer.

Heard rival submissions, perused the order of the Ld. CIT(A).

Ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee observing that there is a delay of 30 days and no explanation was furnished by the assessee. Having dismissed the appeal for want of condonation petition Ld. CIT(A) has also gone into the merits of the additions/disallowances made in the assessment order. The Ld. CIT(A) has not confronted the fact of whether there is any delay in filing of appeal by the assessee or not. The inadvertent mentioning of “No” in the column for giving the details of delay in Form 35 should not come in the way of ascertaining whether there is actual delay or not. In the circumstances, we restore this appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) who shall decide the appeal considering the explanation of the assessee on delay if any, in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29.08.2025

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →