SH. NITIN SINGHAL,HALDWANI vs. PCIT, HALDWAMI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7/DDN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun10 September 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the reasons provided for the delay were casual, not supported by material, and did not constitute sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay. The assessee and their representative did not appear before the Tribunal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. PCIT for AY 2015-16. There was an inordinate delay of 1356 days in filing the appeal. The assessee requested condonation of delay citing COVID-19 situations and issues with restarting business and advice from legal professionals.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned based on the reasons provided by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

IT Act

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI

Hearing: 08/09/2025Pronounced: 10/09/2025

ORDER

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

1.

The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (‘Ld. PCIT’ for short), Haldwani, Uttarakhand, dated 26/02/2020 for the Assessment Year 2015-16.

2.

None appeared for the Assessee. Right from filing of the appeal, neither the Assessee nor the Representative of the Assessee have appeared or made any submission. Therefore, we are compel to decide the Appeal on hearing the Ld. Department's Representative and perusing the material available on record.

3.

There is an inordinate delay of 1356 days in filing the present Appeal. The Assessee filed an application for condonation of delay contending that ‘due to Covid-19 situations and due to giving entire attention on restarting his factory and business and also due to the advice of lawyers and CAs who gave different kinds of opinion which confused the Assessee whether to go for appeal or not.’ The said reasons provided in the application for condonation of delay is not only casual in nature and also not supported with any material. In our considered opinion, the Assessee has failed to explain sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay of 1356 days. Accordingly, the present Appeal is dismissed for delay in latches.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →