Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC which was delayed by 1189 days. The CIT(A)/NFAC refused to condone the delay, holding that the reasons provided were not justifiable.
Held
The Tribunal held that technicalities must give way to substantial justice. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for adjudication on merits, with the assessee to prove their case.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC was justified in refusing to condone the significant delay in filing the appeal, and if substantial justice requires restoration of the appeal.
Sections Cited
143(1)
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 : 2014-15 Vihar Trust, Vs DCIT, B-60-61, C/o Bajaj Auto Ltd. Circle-49(1), Naraina Industrial Area, Phse-II, New Delhi-110002 New Delhi-110028 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAATV0306N Assessee by: Sh. Vaibhav Jhunjhunwala, CA Revenue by : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 23.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23.09.2025 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1078877847(1) dated 24.07.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(1) 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 delay of 1189 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 17.05.2019 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 28.08.2015 thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons.
Vihar Trust 4. 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 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 and restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication on merits within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the assessee shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.