ALL INDIA PANCHYAT PARISHAD,DELHI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD EXEMPT 1(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1359/DEL/2026Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 April 2026AY 2011-123 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 condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), referencing the principle of substantial justice over technicalities. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 129 days. The CIT(A) refused to condone this delay, stating that the reasons provided were not justifiable.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned based on the reasons provided by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

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: “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 06.04.2026Pronounced: 06.04.2026

Date of hearing 06.04.2026 Date of pronouncement 06.04.2026 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Delhi’s DIN & order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070523001(1), involving proceedings under section 144/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay of 129 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 28.01.2019 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 28.12.2018, 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) explaining all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond his control.

4.

That being the case, I 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. Accordingly, the delay caused in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) is condoned and the assessee’s instant appeal is restored back to the CIT(A) for its afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case 2 | P a g e at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings.

Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →