ASHISH DUA,PANIPAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1, PANIPAT, PANIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2457/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 November 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI C. N. PRASAD (Judicial Member), SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to ascertain the sufficient cause for the delay and thereafter decide the appeal on merits if admitted. The assessee was directed to explain the delay.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay of 714 days in filing. The assessee had filed an appeal against the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) could be condoned and the appeal could be admitted on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI C. N. PRASAD & SHRI M. BALAGANESH

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kaushik, Adv, Shri Himanshu Sharma, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Hearing: 23/09/2025Pronounced: 19/11/2025

O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, A. M.: 1. The appeal in AY 2017-18, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’, in short] in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1073164989(1) dated 12.02.2025 against the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated 17.12.2019 by the Assessing Officer, ITO, Ward-1, Panipat (hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. AO’).

2.

The Preliminary Ground raised by the assessee challenging the action of the ld CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal of the assessee by not condoning the delay in filing the appeal by 714 days before ld CIT(A). It is not in dispute that the appeal of the assessee filed before the ld CIT(A) was delayed by 714 days. The ld AR before us pleaded that one more opportunity be granted to the Page | 1 assessee to explain the delay and to prove the sufficient cause before the ld CIT(A). In the interest of substantial justice, we deem it fit and appropriate to restore this appeal to the file of the ld CIT(A) with direction to ascertain whether assessee had sufficient cause in not filing the appeal in time before ld CIT(A) and thereafter decide the appeal, if admitted, on merits afresh. The assessee is also directed to explain the sufficient cause of not filing the appeal in time before the ld CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal is restored to the file of the ld CIT(A).

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →