Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed its return of income for AY 2021-22. Following an intimation under section 143(1) which raised a demand, the assessee appealed to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as time-barred.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on a technical ground of limitation without considering the merits. It emphasized that substantial justice should prevail over technicalities and the matter deserved to be restored for adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on limitation without adjudicating the merits, and whether the delay should be condoned to allow for substantial justice.
Sections Cited
143(1), 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH-RANCHI
Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay
order
: February 05, 2026 ORDER
Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) dated 31.03.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2021–22. While processing the return, an intimation under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, was issued on 24.12.2024, raising a demand.
Aggrieved by the said intimation, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). However, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine,
Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee filed the present appeal. The Ld. AR submitted that the appeal was dismissed merely on a technical ground of limitation, without providing the assessee an opportunity to explain the delay or to substantiate its claim on merits. It was prayed that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to place relevant documents on record and the matter be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).
On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the order of the CIT(A).
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the technical ground of delay, without examining the issues on merits. It is well settled law that substantial justice should prevail over technicalities, and when the issues involved require adjudication on merits, the appellate authority should adopt a liberal approach in matters relating to condonation of delay. In the present case, we are of the considered view that the matter deserves to be restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, we restore the matter to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal on merits, after granting reasonable opportunity to the assessee, and direct the assessee to cooperate and file necessary documents in support of its claim.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 5th February, 2026.