Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 506 days, claiming the delay was due to communication being sent to an incorrect email ID and phone number, making them unaware of the proceedings. They only became aware of the demand notice recently and took immediate steps to file the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay after considering the submissions and the affidavit, finding that the assessee had a genuine explanation for the delay. The Tribunal also noted the assessee's history of being casual with tax matters and imposed a cost.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned based on the provided explanation and whether the impugned order should be set aside and remanded.
Sections Cited
250, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B”NEW DELHI
Before: SHRIMAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE & SHRISANJAY AWASTHI
आदेश /O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
1. In this case the ITAT registry has reported a delay of 506 days in the filing of the present appeal. The assessee has filed documents seeking condonation of the delay as under:
i) Application for condonation of delay:
BEFORE THE HON’BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI) In the matter of RAJU RANA, PAN: AHTPR1448P Sub: Application for condonation of delay 506 days in submission of appeal against orders u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act. A.Y.2012-13 The Appellant most respectfully submits as under:
That the present appeal is being filed against the order passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), dated 29.12.2023.
That there has been a delay of 506 days in filing the said appeal before this Hon’ble Tribunal against the order issued by CIT(A). The due date for filing the appeal was 27.02.2024, however, the present appeal has been filed on 17.07.2025.
3. The delay in filing the appeal is neither intentional nor deliberate but solely on account of the fact that the entire communication from the Assessing Officer was sent to an incorrect email ID and phone number, which belonged to a third party and not the assessee. As such, the assessee remained completely unaware of the assessment proceedings and the order passed thereunder.
4. That the assessee first came to know about the assessment order and the resultant demand only upon receiving the physical demand notice recently. Upon becoming aware of the same, the assessee took immediate steps and without any further delay filed this appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal.
That the assessee has a bona fide explanation for the delay, and there was no willful default, negligence, or mala-fide intention on part of the assessee in not filing the appeal within the prescribed period. 6. The Hon’ble Supreme Court and various Benches of the ITAT have consistently held that substantial justice must prevail over technicalities, and when sufficient cause is shown for delay, the same must be condoned to afford an opportunity of being heard. 7. It is humbly submitted that non-condonation of delay would result in grave injustice to the assessee, especially when he had no knowledge of the proceedings due to incorrect contact details being used by the department. PRAYER: In view of the above genuine reasons, assessee prays that the appeal may kindly be accepted and delay in filing the appeal be condoned. We hope you will condone the delay in filing and accept the appeal of the assessee. Thank you ii) Affidavit seeking condonation of delay: BEFORE THE HON’BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE MATTER OF: RAJU RANA ...Appellant
Verses Assessing Officer, National E-Faceless Appeals Centre (NFAC), Delhi ...Respondent AFFIDAVIT SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL I, Raju Rana, C/o Shyam Lai (PAN No. AHTPR1448P), presently residing at Khadi Colony, Panipat, Haryana - 132103, do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under: 1) That the present affidavit is in support of the application for condoning the delay filed in the Appeal against the orders passed by Hon'ble CIT(A) on 29.12.2023. 2) That the appeal was due to be filed on or before27.02.2024, but it was filed on 17.07.2025, resulting in a delay of 506 days. 3) It is submitted that the delay in filing the appeal was due to genuine and unavoidable reasons. 4) That the appeal could not filed within the stipulated time that the entire communication from the Assessing Officer was sent to an incorrect email ID and phone number, which belonged to a third party and not the assessee. 5) That the appellant first came to know about the assessment order and the' resultant demand only upon receiving the physical demand notice recently. 6) That the Appellant had every intention of filing the appeal within the prescribed time, but due to reasons beyond the Appellant's control, the filing could not be completed within the stipulated period. 7) That in view of the above circumstances, the Appellant pray this Hon'ble Tribunal to kindly condone the delay in filing the appeal and accept the appeal for hearing.
1.1 Before us the Ld. AR argued that the assessee was in the dark about the impugned order since allegedly the communication was sent to an incorrect e-mail idand phone number. It was mentioned that the assessee came to know about the appeal only when the demand was sought to be pressed by the Ld. AO.
1.2 We have considered the documents and the affidavit before us and we have heard the Ld. AR. While the Ld. DR has opposed the condonation of delay but it is felt that in the interest of substantive justice, the application for condonation of delay and the supporting affidavit, have to be considered sympathetically and the delay deserves to be condoned. We do so accordingly.
2. This appeal arises from order dated 29.12.2023 passed by Ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi, u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). It is seen that as many as eight notices sent by the office of the Ld. CIT(A)’s were not responded to by the assessee (pages 4 and 5 of the impugned order). Even the assessment order is an ex parte one since the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the Ld. AO. The Ld. AR was asked to explain the reasons for such non- compliance before the authorities below. The Ld. AR has mentioned that the assessee was totally dependent on his tax consultant who kept the assessee in the dark about the proceedings and therefore there could be no worthwhile compliance at any of the stages below.
2.1 The Ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below and left it to the Bench to take an appropriate decision in the matter.
We have carefully considered the rival submissions and have gone through the records before us. It is evident that the assessee has a long history of being casual about attending to tax matters. Considering the totality of facts and even the fact that before the ITAT also there was a substantial delay which, though we have condoned, also demonstrates that the assessee needs to be more careful in future about pending proceedings against him. We are conscious of the fact that considerable resources of the I.T. Department have been expended in dealing with these matters and thus, we deem it fit to impose a cost of Rs.25,000/- on the assessee, payable by 31.01.2026, payable to the High Court Legal Services Committee Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.
Furthermore, we set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment. Needless to say, the assessee would be expected to be vigilant about the notices to be issued by the Ld. AO.
In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 15.12.2025