ALL INDIA PANCHYAT PARISHAD,DELHI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD EXEMPT 1(1), DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
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?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji3,926 citing167 ITR 471 · 1987 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
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.
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.
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.
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
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026