RAJBIR SINGH ,PANIPAT vs. ITO WARD-1 PANIPAT, PANIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3993/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 November 2025AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)3 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, citing the principle of substantial justice over technicalities, restored the appeal to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The assessee was given three opportunities to plead and prove their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal arose from an order of the CIT(A)/NFAC who refused to condone a significant delay in filing the assessee's lower appeal. The assessee did not appear, and the case proceeded ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned to allow for substantial justice, and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,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: ‘G’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 20.11.2025Pronounced: 20.11.2025

Date of hearing 20.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 20.11.2025 ORDER

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM

1.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2013-14, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1075702140(1), dated 21.04.2025 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

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

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay of 314 in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 25.04.2024 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 17.05.2023 thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons.

3.

Faced with the situation, learned departmental representative could hardly dispute that the assessee had indeed filed his condonation petition before the CIT(A)/NFAC explaining all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond his control.

4.

That being the case, we 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 Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →