ARUN KUMAR,ETAH vs. INCOME TAX, AGRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5208/DEL/2025Status: HeardITAT Delhi23 September 2025AY 2019-20Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, citing the precedent in Collector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others, held that technicalities should not obstruct substantial justice. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication, subject to the assessee proving their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC, which was delayed by 130 days. The CIT(A)/NFAC refused to condone the delay, holding that the reasons provided were not justifiable. The assessee's appeal before the tribunal arises from this order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC erred in refusing to condone the delay in filing the appeal without considering substantial justice and relevant judicial precedents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

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: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara

Hearing: 23.09.2025Pronounced: 23.09.2025

Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Arun Kumar, Vs Income Tax Office, Nehru Nagar, Vill. Jaithra, PO, Agra, Jaithra, Etah, U.P.-207249 Uttar Pradesh-282002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AYGPK1386H Assessee by: Sh. Arun Kumar (Assessee) 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 2019-20, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1077187193(1) dated 18.06.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.

3.

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 130 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 15.08.2024 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 09.03.2024 thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons.

Arun Kumar 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.

5.

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 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.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →