SURENDER TOMAR,BIKAJI CAMA PLACE, SAFDARJUNG ENCLAVE, NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 29(1), DELHI, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7773/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 December 2025AY 2017-18Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)2 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 condoned the delay in filing the appeal, citing the larger interest of justice. It noted the possibility of communication gaps and the lack of effective compliance with Section 250(6) of the Act in the lower appellate order. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, providing the appellant three effective opportunities of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18 against a CIT(A) order passed under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. There was a delay of 149 days in filing the appeal. The assessee's counsel contended that due to communication gaps, especially concerning the virtual hearing mechanism, the assessee could not present all relevant facts during the lower appellate proceedings.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned. 2. Whether the CIT(A)'s order, passed under Section 144, should be set aside due to communication gaps and non-compliance with Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250(6)

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: Adv. &
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/250/2025-26/1075910117(1) dated 30.04.2025, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

Delay of 149 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in the larger interest of justice in light of Collector Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

4.

Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower

5.

Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance of the newly introduced virtual hearing mechanism could not be altogether ruled out. This is indeed coupled with the facts that there is also no effective compliance to section 250(6) of the Act in the impugned lower appellate order stipulating points of determination to be framed followed by a detailed adjudication thereupon. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to set aside the assessee’s instant appeal back to the Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →