SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 27832

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI
Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member
Kranti Devi – Appellant
Versus
Income Tax Officer – Respondent
ITA No.4367/Del/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: None
For the Respondents: Manoj Kumar

The judgment emphasizes the importance of natural justice by condoning delays in filing appeals and restoring ex-parte orders to the lower authority for fresh adjudication to ensure the taxpayer has a fair opportunity to be heard.

Headnote:(A) Condonation of Delay - Filing of Appeal - Delay of 598 days condoned in the interest of justice, following established judicial precedents. (Para 2)

(B) Natural Justice - Ex-parte Proceedings - Where the CIT(A) proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, the appeal is restored for fresh adjudication to prevent potential communication gaps and ensure a fair hearing. (Para 5, 6)

Issues: Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) should be set aside for fresh adjudication.

ORDER

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arisesagainst the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065856935(1), dated 20.06.2024 involving proceedings under section 144 of theIncome-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2. For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 598 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji& Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

3. It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A) in its detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the correspondingdisallowances/additions herein.

4. The Revenue during the course of hearing vehemently argues in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had notfiled any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case.

5. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stands and is of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer, auditor and the arguing counsel in such an instance could not be altogether ruledout.

6. Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the cases at her own risk and responsibility, inconsequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

7. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top