ANUPAM NAYYAR,DELHI V. ITO WARD 50(3), DELHI

ITA 6423/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Anupam Nayyar, the appellant, contesting an assessment made by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-50(3), New Delhi, for the assessment year 2012-13. The primary issue was the CIT(A)/NFAC's refusal to condone a 38-day delay in filing an appeal against the Assessing Officer's assessment order dated 24.12.2019. The appellant argued that the delay was due to circumstances beyond his control, which was supported by a condonation petition filed before the CIT(A)/NFAC. The Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others, which prioritizes substantial justice over technical procedural aspects.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 788295 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S URESH BATRA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6423/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anupam Nayyar, 8A/47, W.E.A. Karol Bagh, New Delhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-50(3), New Delhi PAN: ACGPN8853Q (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against 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/250/2025-26/1079888992(1), dated 22.08.2025 involving proceedings under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Heard both the parties. Case file perused. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned Assessee by Sh. Suresh Batra, Adv. Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 25.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 25.11.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.6423/Del/2025 2 | P a g e CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay of 38 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 22.02.2020 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 24.12.2019, thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons. 3. Faced with the situation, learned departmental representative could hardly dispute that the assessee had indeed filed her condonation petition before the CIT(A)/NFAC explaining all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond his control. 4. That being the case, we 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)/NFAC is condoned and the assessee’s instant appeal is restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for its afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.6423/Del/2025 3 | P a g e Order pronounced in the open court on 25th November, 2025 Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 25th November, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "