NARESH KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIVIC CENTRE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7745/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 December 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed (for statistical purposes)

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), citing the principle of prioritizing substantial justice over technicalities, restored the assessee's appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to provide three effective opportunities to the assessee, who must plead and prove their case at their own risk and responsibility. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 was filed against a CIT(A)/NFAC order. The CIT(A) had refused to condone a significant delay of 1976 days in filing the assessee's appeal against the Assessing Officer's assessment, holding that no justifiable reasons for the delay were provided. The assessee did not appear for the hearing and was proceeded ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in refusing to condone a significant delay (1976 days) in filing an appeal against the assessment order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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

Hearing: 23.12.2025Pronounced: 23.12.2025

ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18 arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081362291(1) dated 30.09.2025, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

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 1976 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 11.06.2025 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 26.12.2019 thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons.

1.

Naresh Kumar 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 it’s 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →