Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2011-12 arose against the CIT(A)/NFAC's order which refused to condone the delay in filing the lower appeal. The delay occurred in filing an appeal against the Assessing Officer's assessment framed on 17.12.2018.
Held
The Tribunal, citing the principles from Collector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others, held that technicalities should not impede substantial justice. The assessee's appeal was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, subject to the assessee proving the case.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the assessee's lower appeal should be condoned to allow for substantial justice, despite technical reasons for refusal.
Sections Cited
147, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara
Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Krishna Devi, Vs Income Tax Officer, Solaha Rahi Mandir, Near New Ward-2, Grain Market, Rewari, Rewari, Haryana-123401 Haryana-123401 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. FCBPD5053A Assessee by: Ms. Krishna Devi (Assessee) Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 24.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 24.09.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1079772918(1) dated 20.08.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the sides that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 07.09.2022 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 17.12.2018 thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons.
Faced with this situation, learned departmental representative could hardly dispute that the assessee had indeed explained the above delay before the CIT(A)/NFAC explaining all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond her 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 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 assessee shall plead and prove the case at her own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.