ANAND SWAROOP,SIKANDRABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 17.10.2025 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. At the time of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee has filed the appeal with a delay of 360 days from the date of appellate order. He submitted that the assessee is 86 years old and the order passed by the ld. CIT (A) was sent on his email which was not checked by him. He submitted that the assessee has checked the order of the ld. CIT (A) on 04.11.2023 and since the 2 order was passed without going in the facts of the case and synopsis of arguments,, he filed an application u/s 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on 27.12.2023 before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi, who had not yet passed any order till now. He further submitted that since more than 11 months have passed and no action by the ld. CIT (A)/NFAC, another application u/s 154 filed on 03.12.2024 before Nodal Officer, which is still pending. He further submitted that the delay in filing of appeal of 360 days occurred on account of his application u/s 154 was not disposed by the department and now he opted to file the appeal before the ITAT. In this regard, an affidavit is filed by the assessee which is placed on record. He submitted that in view of the above, the delay in filing the appeal was due to genuine and unavoidable circumstances beyond the assessee’s control and there was no deliberate negligence or mala fide intent on his part. Accordingly, he prayed that the delay may be condoned and remit the issue back to ld. CIT (A). 3. On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue did not object in condoning the delay. 4. We have heard both the counsels on the issue of condonation of delay. In our considered opinion, there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal as the assessee has filed rectification application under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) before ld. CIT (A) for the reason that ld. CIT (A) has not considered any of the argument filed before him. Since there was no communication with regard to application u/s 154, the assessee filed the 3 present appeal before us with the delay of 360 days. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 5. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee. 6. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that ld. CIT (A) has not considered the facts and written submissions of the assessee in his order and also not responded to the rectification application filed before him. Therefore, we restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT (A) and direct ld. CIT (A) to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue on merit as per law. We also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the ld.CIT (A) on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 17th day of November, 2025 after the conclusion of the hearing. (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER